I ask in this way, because I believe it has 2 answers. Yes and No. Yes, because of Sin generally. If not for sin, there would not have been a fall, and thus, people will go to Hell because of sin. However, they will not be in Hell because of their sin. Christ died for the sins of the world and thus, they will specifically be in Hell because of their unbelief.
I want to quote "Grace" by Lewis Chafer for a moment (breaking or bending my own rules, but I hope it triggers some biblical discussion).
"....through the substitutinary death of Christ for all men as Sin-Bearer (John 1:29; 2 Cor. 5:14,19) the ground of universal divine condemntation is now beause of the personal rejection of the Savior who bore the sin. This is set forth in His Word: "He that believeth on him is not condemnted: bue he that believeth not is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (John 3:18); "But he that believeth not shall be damnted" Mark 16:16."
"In confirmation of the fact that men are now condemned because of unbelief, it should be note that when the Spirit of God approaches the unsaved to convince them of sin, he does not same themk or blame them conerning the sins they have committed, instead he convicts them of the one sin only." Of sin, becuase they believe not on me" (John 16:9). So also, Christians are said to be free from all condemtnaion on the sole ground that they have believed on the Savior. (John 3:18. Cf 5:24; Rom 8:1; 1 Cor 11:32; 2 Cor 5:19)"
"At this point God offers but one remedy. That remedy is Grace."
"Men are either utterly condemned under the universal decree of the Judge of all the earth, or they are perfectly saved and safe in the grace of God as it is in Jesus Christ" Quotes are from pages 41-43.
I do not agree with everything Chafer says, but he puts this well in my opinion.
I submit that Christ died for all sin, and that people will only be in Hell if they do not believe in him. But, they will be in Hell because of sin, because with out the fall, we would not need a savior. All sin was put on Christ at the Cross. If we believe in Christ, we have life in his name or "eternal life."
Christ even died for the sin of unbelief. If he had not, we would all be going to Hell. But eternal life is gained by belief in Christ.
Thus, repentance cannot be a condition of eternal life, becuase the sin is already paid for. If we had to turn from it, then it was not paid for. If I must do something to have eternal life, then it is not unmerited, nor is it grace.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
543 comments:
1 – 200 of 543 Newer› Newest»I like how you said that repentance cannot be a condition for everlasting life because if we had to turn from it then that implies that it was not paid for.
I think that Chafer does a great job too, but he is confusing the cause for the reason.
Unbelief is indeed the cause for one to go to hell, but it is not the reason. The reason is that a man does not have life.
A person can get busted for not showing up to court. This is the reason why he get's busted. But the cause may be that his car got stolen.
He is not busted for the reason that his car was stolen, he was busted for the reason of not showing up in the court.
Good thinking here, Trent!
Antonio
I follow this reasoning perfectly.
If repentance were a condition for eternal life it would be absurd, because who ever turns from ALL sin while in this human flesh? It is impossible.
Antonio, good clarification. Life is gained by Belief in Christ. Thanks for posting!
I Rose, I am glad you enjoyed it!
Hi Trent,
Just got through enjoying all your photos from the mission trip in India! We will be praying God will provide others to follow-up and nurture all that you were able to share with there!
Also, enjoyed your thoughts & comments here; interestingly enough we preached on this topic this morning. Our approach was as follows:
(1) 1John 2:2 Since the Lord Jesus Christ's sacrifice to appease God's justice and wrath, was for all mankind's' sin, then all sin has been satisfactorily accounted for and God's holy wrath is appeased.
(2) Romans 4:5 However, His, once and for all propitiation is conditioned on man's receiving the righteousness of Christ, Eternal Life, and complete forgiveness by simple child like faith in Him, His Person and His Work.(1John 5:9-13)
(3) John 3:18 Sadly, unbelievers do not enjoy the desired result and favorable benefit of God's grace, not because of any fault in Christ's supreme sacrifice, but because they (unbelievers) "opt out" via their unbelief.
(4) Romans 6:23 Wages are a payment according to man's earned righteousness, based on the work that a person performs. In the eyes of God, all man's behavior apart from God's grace in the work of Christ is sin and is man's work, thus the wages earned are death.(Eternal separation from God & His righteousness 2Thess 1:9)
Unbelievers do not experience its efficacy, not because it has any fault but simply because they do not believe.(Rev. 20:15)
We went in to more depth and Scriptures, but in essence I think this captures our position.
Have a Christ centered New Year!
Pastor Bruce, thanks for visiting! I have been getting updates on some of the new believers being baptized and discipled, but the follow up continues and prayer is appreciated! Thanks for sharing your message as well.
I recently read the short piece on the GES website titled, "The Sin of Unbelief." It appears that this blog entry is based on that piece. In it we read, "A cause and a reason are not the same thing. Unbelief is the cause for the unsaved not having eternal life. Not having eternal life is the reason they are condemned to hell." In philosophical terms it might be clearer to say that unbelief is the instrumental cause, while not having eternal life is the efficient cause for condemnation. Any thoughts?
Trent:
YOU SAID:
"I ask in this way, because I believe it has 2 answers. Yes and No. Yes, because of Sin generally. If not for sin, there would not have been a fall, and thus, people will go to Hell because of sin. However, they will not be in Hell because of their sin. Christ died for the sins of the world and thus, they will specifically be in Hell because of their unbelief.."
Let me ask you this: What's the difference between sin generally, and the sin of unbelief? Isn't sin, well, sin? They can't be in hell for sin generally because Christ died for ALL SIN. He wiped the slate clean, so to speak. As sin and death came through one man, Adam, so remission of sin came for all through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, Romans 5:12.
So, according to you, the ONLY reason people can be in hell is for the sin of unbelief. If Christ died for ALL sin, then he died for the sin of unbelief, took away the punishment for unbelief and people could not be in hell for that particular sin. Now the question becomes, just what in hell are people in hell for? How can it be for unbelief? Unbelief is a sin and Christ died for that sin.
I don't see how you can have it both ways.
YOU SAY:
"I submit that Christ died for all sin, and that people will only be in Hell if they do not believe in him. But, they will be in Hell because of sin, because with out the fall, we would not need a savior. All sin was put on Christ at the Cross. If we believe in Christ, we have life in his name or "eternal life."
Now, how does you statement square with John 3:5? "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
Also, my bible has a cross reference to Titus 3:5: "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.
Actually, belief isn't even mentioned in either of these passages, at this particular point, but the instructions are clear and to the point. Nicodemus was not some uneducated nincompoop. He was a member of the ruling council of Israel. Sanhedrin membership was a position of great authority. He believed in God. How can a man be born again, he asks? Go back into his mother's womb?
JESUS continues: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." vv 6-8
A regenerated person is according to Eph. 2:1 is dead in trespasses and sins and in verse 3 he says you WERE BY NATURE CHILDREN OF WRATH.. Sounds to me like at this point, unless there is a divine miracle by the Holy Spirit, those people who by nature are children of wrath will be in hell. But wait, God in his mercy , while they were in that state, "made us alive."
So, I'm not sure how you explain this. In other words, unless there is a divine miracle by God making a spiritually dead person, alive by the gift of faith and or, belief, you are destined for hell. But Jesus died for unbelief, so how do you explain unbelievers going to hell?
I would say that belief or regeneration, or being born again is what is necessary. Belief is a part of regeneration. So I rather put it this way. If a person is not BORN from Above, by the power of the Holy Spirit, by God Alone, then he ends up in hell. Why in hell? Because he was not regenerated.
Maybe we are saying the same thing. I maintain that we would end up in hell, not because of something we didn't do toward our own salvation (believe), but because we were not born again by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. Where do you disagree?
Hey Donald, thanks for visiting again! :) Lets see if I can't try and clarify this for you.
You said "So, according to you, the ONLY reason people can be in hell is for the sin of unbelief. If Christ died for ALL sin, then he died for the sin of unbelief, took away the punishment for unbelief and people could not be in hell for that particular sin. Now the question becomes, just what in hell are people in hell for? How can it be for unbelief? Unbelief is a sin and Christ died for that sin. "
No, I believe he died for all sin because the Bible is clear on this. Even the sin of unbelief. However Belief is how you gain eternal life which happens to be the only way to avoid hell. If you do not have Eternal life gained by belief in Christ, then you will be in Hell. This
Donald said "Now, how does you statement square with John 3:5? "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
he then explains, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Then Christ explains how you become born again or born of the Spirit. John 3:15-18 is very clear about how you are born of the spirit and how you gain eternal life or as John in John and Revelations sometimes calls it "Life in His Name"
Donald says "Also, my bible has a cross reference to Titus 3:5: "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost."
Different author who is writing to believers who already have eternal life. They got it the same way we did. Go to vs 8. Those who have "believed" in God should be careful to maintain good works as they are good and profitable to men."
Donald says "Actually, belief isn't even mentioned in either of these passages, at this particular point, but the instructions are clear and to the point. Nicodemus was not some uneducated nincompoop. He was a member of the ruling council of Israel. Sanhedrin membership was a position of great authority. He believed in God. How can a man be born again, he asks? Go back into his mother's womb? "
Nicodemus is clearly told it is by belief, and as I noted, Titus mentions belief as well, both in the passages noted.
Donald says "A regenerated person is according to Eph. 2:1 is dead in trespasses and sins and in verse 3 he says you WERE BY NATURE CHILDREN OF WRATH.. Sounds to me like at this point, unless there is a divine miracle by the Holy Spirit, those people who by nature are children of wrath will be in hell. But wait, God in his mercy , while they were in that state, "made us alive."
as we go on to another subject, keep in mind that you have this has to not contradict John. so lets look at it I think agreeing that John teaches eternal life is gained simply by belief in Christ. Moving on, in Eph 1:7 "in him we have redemption through His blood,(eternal life?) the forgiveness of sins (fellowship?)according to the richs of His grace which he made to abound toward us in all wisdom and purdence... " vs 11 "...obtaining an inheritance..." vs 12 "..that we who first trusted in Chrsit should be to the praise of his glory." 13 "in Him you als trusted after you heard the word of truth the gospel of your salvation in whom also you BELIEVED you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise... " vs 15 " .. after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints.." vs 17 "Father of glory may give to you the spirit of wisdom..." vs 18-21 " ... that you may know what is the hope of his calling, what are the richs of the glory of His inheritance in the saints and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe according to the workng of His mighty power which worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the Heavenly places far above ... in this age and the age to come." I like to get things in context.. and please note, I just took excepts mainly because it takes solong to type. Please read the whole passage. There is a lot more underdiscussion here then simply believe for eternal life. This is speaking of rewards as well. Until we have believed in Christ and have life in his name, we are dead, and have no forgiveness for our sins either. But remember, there is a difference between forgiveness and justification. Roman 3 is clear that with out the righteousness of Christ we fall short. However, since Christ died for our sins, and not just ours but for the world,(note the comparison) he was the sacrifice once and for all. But payment for sin is not the only issue. Continue reading in the book of Ephesians.. especially Eph 4:1.
Donald said "So, I'm not sure how you explain this. In other words, unless there is a divine miracle by God making a spiritually dead person, alive by the gift of faith and or, belief, you are destined for hell. "
Yes, it is a miracle that at the moment of Faith in Christ we have life in his name. Whether faith itself is a gift is a whole discussion on its own. :) Obviously he did give us the ability to believe, and belief is not a choice, but to listen, and to meditate is
Donald said "I would say that belief or regeneration, or being born again is what is necessary. Belief is a part of regeneration. "
I think John is clear that Belief causes regeneration or the experience of being born again, and eternal life.
Donald says "So I rather put it this way. If a person is not BORN from Above, by the power of the Holy Spirit, by God Alone, then he ends up in hell. Why in hell? Because he was not regenerated."
Now that I went through all these passges, I think we do agree mostly LOL. Having life in Jesus or regeneration is gained by Belief in Christ. I need to read the complete post before answering LOL
Donald said "Maybe we are saying the same thing. I maintain that we would end up in hell, not because of something we didn't do toward our own salvation (believe), but because we were not born again by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. Where do you disagree?"
How are we born again? I would say believe. I think you agree but if not clarify. So I think our disagreement is just that I used the precursor of belief in Jesus rather then also clarifying the result of Life in Jesus which is really what does keep us there. I think you made the same clarification that Antonio did actually and in my reply I thought I mentioned he was right. :)
Thanks for provoking me! :)
Love in Christ
Trent :)
YOU SAID:
How are we born again? I would say believe. I think you agree but if not clarify. So I think our disagreement is just that I used the precursor of belief in Jesus rather then also clarifying the result of Life in Jesus which is really what does keep us there. I think you made the same clarification that Antonio did actually and in my reply I thought I mentioned he was right. :)"
OK, I think we do basically agree. And of course Ephesians can't contradict John. And John can't contradict Ephesians.
One more clarification: YOU SAID: " But remember, there is a difference between forgiveness and justification. Roman 3 is clear that with out the righteousness of Christ we fall short."
Explain the difference between Justification and remission of sins, or as the modern translations put it, forgiveness of sins. To me being justified, declared righteousness, given a right standing before the Thrice Holy God, are the same time. And of course, being declared righteous, is not our righteousness, but the righteousness of Christ imputed to us. (I swear, I think we are saying the same thing, but using slightly different terms).
OK, while I'm at it, you say being born again means believing. I agree, but it seems that it is more than that.
What do you think it means in John 3:3 to be BORN OF WATER? And then Spirit. And terms like in Titus 3:5, the WASHING OF REGENERATION, to me do seem to refer to that divinely instituted rite, baptism. The Jewish listeners, having for centuries baptized their converts, and by the way, the infants and children of those converts, would have understood those verses as referring to baptism, don't you think? Water and Spirit and cleansing, like the cleansing of the leper etc., always were connected. Then when you have water, regeneration, washing, Spirit, and the WORD of God altogether, well that pretty well defines baptism.
I don't want to get off the subject because that is another whole issue, and I'm totally burned out on discussing it, but my point is yes, belief in Christ is an essential part of being Born Again. However, so is the "water and the Spirit," according to John, and also in Mark believe and be baptized, the jailer, believe and be baptized, in Acts believe and be baptized etc.
And the bottom line is that after all that, we can't believe without that divine miracle of regeneration.
I guess I have to continue to insist that we do not choose to believe. We can't, without God first enabling us. Like you favorite guy John records Jesus saying: I CHOSE YOU, YOU DIDN'T CHOOSE ME.
To put everything another way. Instead of talking about general sin, or the sin of unbelief putting in hell, I'd simplify the whole thing and say..you will be in hell if not BORN AGAIN BY WATER AND THE SPIRIT.
Belief, well yes, but belief is not possible without God FIRST doing what? Let Paul speak to you:
Eph 2:5--5Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
So, if you end up in hell it's because Christ hasn't QUICKENED you so that you can believe in the first place. So are we back to the difference between the "cause of something, and the reason."? The guy not showing up for court, and the car not working. Somethings I think everyone makes this stuff too complicated.
Back to work until Sunday, so time is very, very limited. Later.
donald said "Explain the difference between Justification and remission of sins, or as the modern translations put it, forgiveness of sins. To me being justified, declared righteousness, given a right standing before the Thrice Holy God, are the same time. And of course, being declared righteous, is not our righteousness, but the righteousness of Christ imputed to us. (I swear, I think we are saying the same thing, but using slightly different terms)."
We could look at many passages, but probably 1 john 1:9 works. Its written to believers who are already justified. do a study for remission and forgiveness and you will find interesting contexts.
OK, while I'm at it, you say being born again means believing. I agree, but it seems that it is more than that.
What do you think it means in John 3:3 to be BORN OF WATER? And then Spirit. And terms like in Titus 3:5, the WASHING OF REGENERATION, to me do seem to refer to that divinely instituted rite, baptism. The Jewish listeners, having for centuries baptized their converts, and by the way, the infants and children of those converts, would have understood those verses as referring to baptism, don't you think? Water and Spirit and cleansing, like the cleansing of the leper etc., always were connected. Then when you have water, regeneration, washing, Spirit, and the WORD of God altogether, well that pretty well defines baptism.
I think it tells you what it means in the next sentance. water is born of flesh. If its not, there are millions of people including the criminal on the cross who believed in Christ yet will be in hell because they did not undergo water baptism. you are looking at one passage in John that according to your interpretation contradicts dozens of other passages. If it does, then you have to reinterpret all the others to say believe means be baptized, and that is definetely not in the text. Why not use the clear and easy passages to help understand the harder.. though IMO thats not hard since he does explain, and then explains exactly what a person must do to have eternal life in john 3:16. If Baptism was required for eternal life, John 3:16 would be written differently. I know you are discussing this on the grace church forums, and have avoided getting involved there, but you did bring it up. :)
I don't want to get off the subject because that is another whole issue, and I'm totally burned out on discussing it, but my point is yes, belief in Christ is an essential part of being Born Again. However, so is the "water and the Spirit," according to John, and also in Mark believe and be baptized, the jailer, believe and be baptized, in Acts believe and be baptized etc.
The question of what must I do to be saved was "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved!" The fact that he got baptized shows he was following Christ. Claiming its required requires you to have a presupposition already. You don't get it soley from the text. I know this is an important tradition to you, and its an important thing, its just not required for eternal life.
And the bottom line is that after all that, we can't believe without that divine miracle of regeneration.
Wait... so you are saying we must be regenerate before we believe?... That one I think we can cover if thats what you are stating. Would you like to discuss that? Please clarify.
I guess I have to continue to insist that we do not choose to believe. We can't, without God first enabling us. Like you favorite guy John records Jesus saying: I CHOSE YOU, YOU DIDN'T CHOOSE ME.
We can discuss this too, but I should start another post.
To put everything another way. Instead of talking about general sin, or the sin of unbelief putting in hell, I'd simplify the whole thing and say..you will be in hell if not BORN AGAIN BY WATER AND THE SPIRIT.
Belief, well yes, but belief is not possible without God FIRST doing what? Let Paul speak to you:
Eph 2:5--5Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
And I can say because I believed in Christ.. it appears you are saying you are saved and then you believe, which contradicts many passages.
So, if you end up in hell it's because Christ hasn't QUICKENED you so that you can believe in the first place. So are we back to the difference between the "cause of something, and the reason."? The guy not showing up for court, and the car not working. Somethings I think everyone makes this stuff too complicated.
Back to work until Sunday, so time is very, very limited. Later.
Ok, you definetely opened up a can of workms. :) Do you want to focus on baptism, or Regenerated before you can believe or do you consider them to interlocked and need to discuss them both?
Thanks for taking the time to talk Donald.
Love in Christ
Trent
Trent:
I haven't had time to read your post since I'm headed to work. I will answer you Sunday or Monday.
I will say you have to be "quickened," chosen, regenerated, born again, however you want to term it, BEFORE you can believe. Absolutely. Without God's regenerating you, you are under the wrath of God, and not only that, you are at enmity with God, and CANNOT believe, come to him or do ANYTHING for your salvation.
Just one added thing about belief:
You say the ONLY reason one is in hell is because he didn't RECEIVE with the Atonement provided. So, let me ask you this.
If Christ died for ALL of the sins of all the people, then he died for unbelief, right?
But this unbelief, is it a sin, or not? If not, why should unbelievers be punished for it? IF IT IS, THEN CHRIST UNDERWENT THE PUNISHMENT FOR IT, OR HE DIDN'T. IF he did, then why is that any different than any other sin you would be punished for? Of course, if he didn't did for the unbelief, then he didn't die for ALL sins. Which way is it?
I'm sick to death of discussing baptism, and the so-called order of salvation.
I'm just stating the whole trend of scripture when I say that without God choosing you before the foundation of the world, before your name iis put into the Book of Life, before you can believe any thing toward your salvation, you must be born again by the power of the Holy Spirit. That is a miracle strictly of God, from God, iniatied by God, and done TO YOU AND FOR YOU without your cooperation, without any input from you, without any cooperation from you, without any contribution from you. Period. Just like your physical birth, your spiritual birth is a divine miracle, without which you CANNOT see/enter the Kingdom of Light.
THAT is the biblical view of salvation. Nothing more, nothing less. Man is not just sick and needing medicine. He is DEAD and needs spiritual resuresstion. And we can't have a partially living corpse. The corpse is DEAD.
That is a can of worms, and it is exactly what fallen, depraved, humanistic man can't stand. They rebel against it, but that is to be expected, since the spiritual things of God MUST be spiritually discerned. The unregenerated man CANNOT discern the thinks of God. 1 cor 2:14.
Later.
Hi Donald, I will wait for you to read my posts, because I think I covered belief being a sin. That seems to be most of your post.
Donald says "I'm just stating the whole trend of scripture when I say that without God choosing you before the foundation of the world, before your name iis put into the Book of Life, before you can believe any thing toward your salvation, you must be born again by the power of the Holy Spirit. That is a miracle strictly of God, from God, iniatied by God, and done TO YOU AND FOR YOU without your cooperation, without any input from you, without any cooperation from you, without any contribution from you. Period. Just like your physical birth, your spiritual birth is a divine miracle, without which you CANNOT see/enter the Kingdom of Light. "
It sounds like you want to get into predestination. :) Lets leave that one in the back ground and focus whether someone is saved prior to belief.
Donald said "THAT is the biblical view of salvation. Nothing more, nothing less. Man is not just sick and needing medicine. He is DEAD and needs spiritual resuresstion. And we can't have a partially living corpse. The corpse is DEAD."
At the moment they are convinced of the truth and believe, they have eternal life. Not before as I will argue if thats your stance. :)
Donald said "That is a can of worms, and it is exactly what fallen, depraved, humanistic man can't stand. They rebel against it, but that is to be expected, since the spiritual things of God MUST be spiritually discerned. The unregenerated man CANNOT discern the thinks of God. 1 cor 2:14."
But can he trust in the Christ for eternal life? :) I say yes, if the Holy Spirit helps which I believe he does for those who are seeking or open to truth.
You have said it before, its what the Bible teaches, not our logic. Does the Bible teach regeneration before belief?
Trent said:
"I think it tells you what it means in the next sentence. water is born of flesh."
So, the word "water' in both of those passages were just some type of filler and didn't refer to anything?
I'm working on a response to your other posts, but I will say now, that you have the cart before the horse. How in the world can you "believe," before you are regenerated/born again? How can a spiritually dead person do anything? I'll go into that, although you said not to get into predestination. I won't, other than to say salvation includes many things, belief, regeneration, redemption, sanctification, glorification, adoption, foreknowledge, calling, etc. I admit you have a temporal order when discussing how salvation is applied, but remember, regeneration/salvation is an eternal, divine event. We can get into all that if you like, or if you would rather to all that later, that's fine. Maybe we are getting off the subject a little bit. I don't know. You question was about sin and hell, not regeneration, so maybe that's my fault for expanding the discussion.
Let me know if you want to refocus on the original question. We can discuss any and all subjects whenever you like, but maybe we should narrow the focus (or rather, maybe I should narrow the focus}. Let me know, or if you like, ask me a specific question that I can respond to. I think sometimes these replies get way too long.
Awaiting further instructions. You're the man!!
Trent, let's just cut to the quick here.
WHY DID YOU BELIEVE?
I believed because I was convinced that Christ gave eternal life to all who believed.
Note the following.
John 1:12 ... as many as recieved him he gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in his name.
John 3, Jesus explains how to become born again.. he does not say, you already are so don't worry about it.
Note John 3:15 whoever believes in him .. have eternal life, not who ever has will believe.
3:16 whoever believes will not perish. not he who is not perishing willl believe.
3:18 He who believes in Him is not condemtned, but he who does not believe is condemned already. So a regenerate person who is born again and quickened is condemned?
John 4 with the samaritan. She asked for the living water. He did not say you already have it. He says I can give it to you.
Vs 41, why did they believe?
John 5:24. At what time does someone have eternal life? has passed from death unto life?
John 6:29 ... the work of God is to believe? Vs 27 tells you for waht.
John 6:47.
John 7:37-39 If anyone thirst let him come to me. He who believes in me as the Scripture has said...
John 11:25
The order is always believe for eternal life.
What passages would you like to consider that you feel teach regeneration prior to Belief?
Its up to you if you want to cover unbelief as a Sin, or just continue this one for now. The blog is not overly busy where anyone is going to get lost. :)
Your ball. :)
Grace and Truth
Trent
In following these posts, may I ask this question?
Im wondering at what point did mankind "become dead in trespasses and sin"? Was it when Adam & Eve actually partook of the tree of knowledge of good & evil? If so, how is it they were still capable of having dialog with God.(Genesis 3) Then Scripture goes on to makes it clear that even Cain has awareness of God and response to God's conviction and appeal in Genesis 4? I'm thinking whatever we understand "dead in trespasses & sin" to mean, it must not mean what the typical calvinist requires it to mean?
Hi Abercrombie! Thanks for visiting.
Thats a great question and I want to consider it. I also wanted to mention something that I was thinking about last night in bed. How did the Old Testament Saints believe since they did not have the Holy Spirit? I know the Holy Spirit helps to convince us of the truth, and helps us interpret scripture, but obviously some truth can be learned even by those who do not have the Holy Spirit. Ok lets consider your question.
Abercrombie said "In following these posts, may I ask this question?
Im wondering at what point did mankind "become dead in trespasses and sin"? Was it when Adam & Eve actually partook of the tree of knowledge of good & evil? If so, how is it they were still capable of having dialog with God.(Genesis 3) Then Scripture goes on to makes it clear that even Cain has awareness of God and response to God's conviction and appeal in Genesis 4? I'm thinking whatever we understand "dead in trespasses & sin" to mean, it must not mean what the typical calvinist requires it to mean?
I tend to agree with you and I think its funny that I was thinking about the same type thing. Excellent point!
Grace and Truth
Trent
While the Holy Spirit did not function as fully in the Old Testament Saints, he did function. There are a lot of scriptures that mention the Holy Spirit as active in the Old Testament.
Here are a couple of scriptures for consideration. Great question thought:
"The Lord said to Moses, "Bring Me seventy of Israel's elders who are known to you as leaders and officials among the people. Have them come to The Tent Of Meeting, that they may stand there with you. I will come down and speak with you there, and I will take of The Spirit that is on you and put The Spirit on them. They will help you carry the burden of the people so you will not have to carry it alone." (Numbers 11:16-17)
"So The Lord said to Moses, "Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is The Spirit, and lay your hand on him." (Numbers 27:18.
Great question about the Holy Spirit in the OT. However, even though not active in the same way s the NT, no indwelling in the person, to best of my knowledge, he is active to some extent.
This is just a brief comment, as I'm at work. But a couple of verses to consider:
"The Lord said to Moses, "Bring Me seventy of Israel's elders who are known to you as leaders and officials among the people. Have them come to The Tent Of Meeting, that they may stand there with you. I will come down and speak with you there, and I will take of The Spirit that is on you and put The Spirit on them. They will help you carry the burden of the people so you will not have to carry it alone." (Numbers 11:16-17)
"So The Lord said to Moses, "Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is The Spirit, and lay your hand on him." (Numbers 27:18).
"The woman gave birth to a boy and named him Samson. He grew and The Lord blessed him, and The Spirit of The Lord began to stir him..." (Judges 13:24-25)
Sorry, was doing something else, and hit the wrong button and posted the comment again. Darn I hate that when I do that. Please forgive me.
Trent:
I didn't really ask the question I wanted to when I asked you "Why" did you believe. I should have been more exact and more careful, but asked you HOW YOU BELIEVED?
I can also quote scriptures to back up my position that a person's salvation is from God Alone, and NOTHING that a person can do. Good Grief!! How can a person in the flesh (unregenerated) do anything toward their salvation when the flesh is hostile to God? (Romans 8:5-8). Salvation is a Sovereign Act of God and UNLESS the Holy Spirit ENABLES the natural man to believe, he can't.
Now, just so you know, I am totally burned out on all this debating, especially since it is your quotes against my quotes and on and on. I don't mean you personally, but generally speaking.
So I swear, on a stack of bibles, this is my last post. I have so many books to read and other things to do.
So I wish everyone well, and good-bye.
This is not my post. I'm posting these comments for a friend who tried to enter them on your blog, but could not get the message to show up. So I said I would post it for him.
1) As an unregenerated person, you were of a carnal mind which is "enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be" (Romans 8:7).
2) In that state of mind, as a natural man, you were unable to recognize the things of God because the "natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised" (2Cor 2:14).
3) In fact, said Jesus, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3).
4) Furthermore, the devil has "blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God" (2Cor 2:4).
So, Trent, my question to you is, how did you come to believe? Ultimately, you are espousing a salvation of merit. You say you were persuaded that Jesus is the way to eternal life, yet another person remains unconvinced. Therefore, you merit salvation and he does not. But beyond that, you contend that you were convinced when the Bible says that, in fact, you were blind, unable to recognize the things of God, unable to see the kindgom of God, hostile to the things of God.
You are taking credit for your salvation that the scriptures do not grant you. At the same time, you are diminishing the role of God in your salvation, reducing him to a mere facilitator who only provides the way to salvation. It then is up to us to, ipso facto, save ourselves through a process that is contrary to Scripture. This is a failure to properly humble oneself before Almighty God. The person who takes this position cannot in honesty praise and thank God for his salvation, but only that God has provided the means for that person to save himself.
D. Campbell
P.S. I don't know if he can respond since he had trouble in the first place. But his thoughts are very well stated and should be taken to heart.
Wow, heya Donald, you have been busy! ;)
Yes, the Holy Spirit was active at times, but he did not dwell inside of people.
Keep in mind also, that Nicodemus as an unbeliever was held accountable for knowing what the scripture said, and many people understand truths in Scripture prior to gaining eternal life and perhaps even never gaining them.
Old Testament Saints could have the Holy Spirit in them at times, however not all of them, yet they still understood scripture. It was not nessecary for them, so why is it nessecary for me? I think it is in Nehamiah (sp?) where the Scriptures are found and read for the first time in a long time, and Isreal rejoices understanding them.
Many cultists understand the Creation in Genesis better then believers, yet some of them will never put their faith in Christ.
As to how I believed, it is normal for a child to believe what his parents tell him. My mother did not lie to me that I was aware of and so since I trusted her, when she told me about Christ and that if I believed in him I would have eternal life, I believed her, just like I believed her if she said we were going to Disneyland tomorrow.
I was convinced of the truth of what she said and I gained eternal life because she was right! :)
Donald says "I can also quote scriptures to back up my position that a person's salvation is from God Alone, and NOTHING that a person can do. Good Grief!! How can a person in the flesh (unregenerated) do anything toward their salvation when the flesh is hostile to God? (Romans 8:5-8). Salvation is a Sovereign Act of God and UNLESS the Holy Spirit ENABLES the natural man to believe, he can't.
Your body is dead in sin even with Christ in you. I don't think these are good proof texts. You are better off arguing predestination IMO, but then you have to deal with the verses that talk about our responsibility, Christ's call to us to believe, as well as the fact that God is a rewarder of those who seek him. I do NOT understand everything, but I do understand some things that God has made very clear in his word. I addressed belief before life. What passages will you use to show that you do not have to believe to have eternal life?
You keep quitting the debate :P but at least don't leave until you defend your eternal life before you believe statement. You changed topics instead of defending it from the Bible. :) thats not like you.
I was a bit busy over the weekend, and know you have a life too. If it takes you a few days or longer to respond, its all good.
To Donalds Friend. :)
Not sure why you could not post, but thanks for not giving up! I am reading your post as I reply to it.. so I don't guarantee I will answer it all right now.
Donalds friend said
"1) As an unregenerated person, you were of a carnal mind which is "enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be" (Romans 8:7)."
Read the end of Chapter 7:13 and continue through verse 12 of 8."If YOU live in the flesh you will die" Who is You? Believers living in the flesh cannot please God. "...I serve .... with the flesh the law of Sin" Romans is written to believers and I think since believers can live in the flesh, this has nothing to do with an unbeliever coming to faith in Christ.
2) In that state of mind, as a natural man, you were unable to recognize the things of God because the "natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised" (2Cor 2:14).
I think I addressed some of this above. Your reference is wrong I think as well. even unbelievers are responsible for some knowledge, and their response determines if they will recieve more. Remember Nicodemus. Get me the reference, and lets see what is being discussed.
3) In fact, said Jesus, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3).
Amen. He describes how to be born again to Nicodemus, since Nicodemus is ignorant just a few more verses down.
4) Furthermore, the devil has "blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God" (2Cor 2:4).
wrong quote again.. :( the parable of the sower demonstrates this as well. However, some do believe. I wear a seat belt so that I might not die in an accident yet it is not sure that I won't. It is preventative. When I witness, I pray that the Holy Spirit will remove the blinders that the god of this world has put on them. This still does not mean that a person is regenerate before belief.
So, Trent, my question to you is, how did you come to believe? Ultimately, you are espousing a salvation of merit. You say you were persuaded that Jesus is the way to eternal life, yet another person remains unconvinced. Therefore, you merit salvation and he does not.
No, I was blessed that I had a mother who told me of the promise when I was young. How can being convinced of the truth of something have merit? Since the Bible says it is with out merit, I do as well. Your stating a claim that I do not make as mine does not win the arguement. If I say you claim that God chose you because you were better makes it a salvation you merited is the same thing. Its putting words in your mouth.
But beyond that, you contend that you were convinced when the Bible says that, in fact, you were blind, unable to recognize the things of God, unable to see the kindgom of God, hostile to the things of God.
No, what I am doing is letting the Bible speak for itself. It says that "Anyone" who believes in Jesus Christ has eternal life. I believe that. It says that God loves the world. I believe that. I admit that not everyone has the same opportunity. Saul of Tarsus's conversion experience would convince about anyone I think that Jesus was the Christ. Your belief requires you to ignore to much, and assume that God created some people for damnation that have no choice in the matter. I believe that mans response works with God's knowledge because the Bible teaches both.
You are taking credit for your salvation that the scriptures do not grant you.
No, I am only saved because of Christ. However, my response biblically is required for him to save me. I know that I am saved eternally because of Christ's promise, even if I do not persevere. I know I am predestined because I believed.
At the same time, you are diminishing the role of God in your salvation, reducing him to a mere facilitator who only provides the way to salvation.
Well, lets look at it this way. Since you have no choice, if God is loving, why did he just not make you with out sin? Why does Jesus tell people to believe for eternal life, and not say, since you have eternal life you will believe? You putting words in my mouth does not make it so. Instead of doing that, lets talk about some scripture. You brought up one passage that I addressed that is talking to believers and thus does not prove your point. What else do you believe teaches that we have no choice and have eternal life with out belief in Christ?
It then is up to us to, ipso facto, save ourselves through a process that is contrary to Scripture. This is a failure to properly humble oneself before Almighty God.
more words representing something I do not hold to. Scripture please! :) I was very very clear that scripture does hold to belief in Christ = eternal life above.
The person who takes this position cannot in honesty praise and thank God for his salvation, but only that God has provided the means for that person to save himself.
umm... I don't think this merits a response. Either you do not truly understand what I believe..? Christ died on the cross for my sins or I would be going to hell... so I can't honestly praise him and thank him for my salvation??? I can do nothing but recieve the free gift of eternal life? Ok.. scripture! :)
I look forward to discussing some specific scriptures in regards to eternal life being gained with out belief in Christ as I think that was the object. I already know that Calvinism is a logical building block of beliefs, but I think it lacks and even contradicts scripture in to many ways. I think the main topic is "do you have to have eternal life to believe" so lets discuss that. Thank you for being willing to do so and I hope you figure out how to post! :)
Love in Christ
Trent
Trent, I've argued all of this before on the other board, and it gets nowhere.
Like I said I've so burned out that I am swearing off all of these debates for good.
As for defending my position, like I said, been there done that, and sorry I even started this one.
Now, if you like, answer the one that D Campbell posted (actually I posted it for him because he had trouble with his post showing up). If you answer him and he is still having trouble I will post his answer to you, for him.
I know I'll be accused of cut and run, but that's not it at all. I can defend the position (basically what is known as the 5-Point Calvinist position) quite well, but I am so burned out I can't even think right now. I would not do justice to the position. But if you want to take on Dennis, that would be a good debate. I think he is fresh and ready to go. So have at it.
Peace
Hi Donald. :) Take a break and come back. Calvinism is easy to defend.. until you hit scripture. Then to make it easy, it requires presuppositions and turning from what clear scripture seems to be clear on IMO. I used to be calvinist because it was all I heard. Then I had someone challenge me to let Scripture speak for itself. It took time because I was very stubborn, but over time, I was convinced.
So lets pick a scripture, and discuss it. Lets focus on it unless we need to go to another scripture that is very clear just to clarify what it can't mean.
We KNOW Belief in Christ = eternal life. Its very clearly taught in simple to understand scriptures, so we know that if works = salvation, its not eternal life. (if you disagree, lets discuss a passage or 2 I quote up above) If you believe rom 8 is the only passage that teaches regeneration nessecary before belief, and don't agree its speaking to believers, we can focus on that one, or your friend and I can. :) Iron sharpens iron my friend.
Nice try my friend, but I have lost heart for all this. I don't know, maybe in a few months or something.
You said:
"Iron sharpens iron my friend." It does, and I've been there, done that. But right now I'm pressed flat. I just don't have it in me to go through all this again. Not just with you, but all over the place, time and time again, with the same responses, basically.
However, when Dennis (his name, so you know, is Dennis Campbell) reads your response he will answer you and I will post his response if he can't do it.
I'm so tired of saying this, and this is MY last word because I could quote, let's see, in the back of my bible I have eight pages of scriptures that I have written down over the years dealing with salvation and whether it's one or a thousand, I beg off the discussion.
An unregenerated person, without God drawing him (Acts 6:44) (dragging, like in Acts 16:19) CANNOT come to Christ. People like to keep quoting the "Whosoever" believes, or comes etc., and that is true. Whosoever comes, comes, but the "whosoever" includes only those first drawn efficaciously by God. The "draw" does not mean common grace, previenent (i think that's the term Arnimians use) grace making it possible to come.
Good Grief!! Even in the one verse in John 6:44 the drawing is not wooing, like I guess I'll woo the pale of water from the well, or coaxing, but efficacious. Those He "draws" Jesus goes on to say, I WILL raise up at the last day. So I draw efficaciously, then I will raise those up.
I'm done. Please carry on with Dennis. The only time you will hear from me is if his post shows up under my name, and I will preface it with: DENNIS RESPONDS.
Peace, brother!
DENNIS RESPONDS:
Trent, this is going to be long, because I believe it is important to include my original comments and your responses. Otherwise, it makes no sense.
1) I wrote: As an unregenerate person, you were of a carnal mind which is "enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be" (Romans 8:7)."
You responded: Read the end of Chapter 7:13 and continue through verse 12 of 8."If YOU live in the flesh you will die" Who is You? Believers living in the flesh cannot please God. "...I serve .... with the flesh the law of Sin" Romans is written to believers and I think since believers can live in the flesh, this has nothing to do with an unbeliever coming to faith in Christ.
This verse has everything to do with the unregenerate man. When we were in our unregenerate state, we were hostile to God and powerless to submit to God. This is obvious on the face of it. That is the clear meaning of the scripture: The mind of sinful man is death and unable to submit to God. We as believers “are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in [us].”
2) I wrote: In that state of mind, as a natural man, you were unable to recognize the things of God because the "natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised" (2Cor 2:14).
You responded: I think I addressed some of this above. Your reference is wrong I think as well. even unbelievers are responsible for some knowledge, and their response determines if they will recieve more. Remember Nicodemus. Get me the reference, and lets see what is being discussed.
Yes, my reference was wrong – I wrote 2 Corinthians when it is 1 Corinthians, chapter 2. My apologies. In that, Paul says that “We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” Again, Paul is speaking with the utmost clarity: Before one has the Spirit, he cannot accept the things of God. Not will not, but cannot. We understand because we have the Spirit. So, when you say that you were convinced through human means you are speaking against the scripture.
3) I wrote: In fact, said Jesus, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3).
You responded: Amen. He describes how to be born again to Nicodemus, since Nicodemus is ignorant just a few more verses down.
Yes, he describes how to be born again. That isn’t at issue here. The issue is, where does the ability come from? Until you are born again, you cannot see the kingdom of God. How, then, were you convinced? Well, Lydia listened to Paul speak (Acts 16:14) and “The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message.” She didn’t respond to Paul’s message because she was convinced by Paul, but because the Lord opened her heart. First, the Word is preached. Then, God brings about the response. Again, this is quite clear.
4) I wrote: Furthermore, the devil has "blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God" (2Cor 2:4).
You responded: wrong quote again.. :( the parable of the sower demonstrates this as well. However, some do believe. I wear a seat belt so that I might not die in an accident yet it is not sure that I won't. It is preventative. When I witness, I pray that the Holy Spirit will remove the blinders that the god of this world has put on them. This still does not mean that a person is regenerate before belief.
I find your statement puzzling. You say that you pray that the Spirit will remove the blinders from the person to whom you are witnessing, yet you seem to be saying that if that is not done, this person still can respond to your message. How?
5) I wrote: So, Trent, my question to you is, how did you come to believe? Ultimately, you are espousing a salvation of merit. You say you were persuaded that Jesus is the way to eternal life, yet another person remains unconvinced. Therefore, you merit salvation and he does not.
You responded: No, I was blessed that I had a mother who told me of the promise when I was young. How can being convinced of the truth of something have merit? Since the Bible says it is with out merit, I do as well. Your stating a claim that I do not make as mine does not win the arguement. If I say you claim that God chose you because you were better makes it a salvation you merited is the same thing. Its putting words in your mouth.
You continue to be wrong, Trent. Your mother told you of the promise, but according to the scriptures you were unable to recognize the truth of it. I’m not putting words into your mouth: Logically, if you say that you were able in your own power to do what someone else was unable to do, then you are claiming salvation by merit.
6) I wrote: But beyond that, you contend that you were convinced when the Bible says that, in fact, you were blind, unable to recognize the things of God, unable to see the kingdom of God, hostile to the things of God.
You responded: No, what I am doing is letting the Bible speak for itself. It says that "Anyone" who believes in Jesus Christ has eternal life. I believe that. It says that God loves the world. I believe that. I admit that not everyone has the same opportunity. Saul of Tarsus's conversion experience would convince about anyone I think that Jesus was the Christ. Your belief requires you to ignore to much, and assume that God created some people for damnation that have no choice in the matter. I believe that mans response works with God's knowledge because the Bible teaches both.
Your argumentation simply does not make sense. That the Bible says that anyone who believes in Christ has eternal life is not the issue. The issue is HOW that is accomplished. Jesus said (John 6:44) that "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him….” The word translated “draw” means to compel with superior power. So we see a clear delineation of salvation: We are chosen by God (Ephesians 1), the Father draws us to Christ, and our hearts are opened by the Spirit to respond to the message. Where is the human effort in this?
7) I wrote: You are taking credit for your salvation that the scriptures do not grant you.
You responded: No, I am only saved because of Christ. However, my response biblically is required for him to save me. I know that I am saved eternally because of Christ's promise, even if I do not persevere. I know I am predestined because I believed.
Again, Trent, you are not speaking logically. If you say that you were saved because you believed through your own human effort, you are taking credit for your own salvation. And the Bible does not say you were predestined because you believe, but the opposite: You believed because you were predestined.
8) I wrote: At the same time, you are diminishing the role of God in your salvation, reducing him to a mere facilitator who only provides the way to salvation.
You responded: Well, lets look at it this way. Since you have no choice, if God is loving, why did he just not make you with out sin? Why does Jesus tell people to believe for eternal life, and not say, since you have eternal life you will believe? You putting words in my mouth does not make it so. Instead of doing that, lets talk about some scripture. You brought up one passage that I addressed that is talking to believers and thus does not prove your point. What else do you believe teaches that we have no choice and have eternal life with out belief in Christ?
I don’t know why God did things the way he did them, other than to say that if God is perfect then he is bound by his own perfection to do everything in the way that is best. I cannot conceive of God saying, “This is not the best way to do it, but I’m going to do it anyway.” I only know what the scriptures have revealed to me. I accept what they say, and I abandon myself to the mercy of God. The scriptures say with abundant clarity that we who believe were chosen, drawn to Christ and enabled to believe. I don’t dispute that, and I am unable to understand why you do.
9) I wrote: It then is up to us to, ipso facto, save ourselves through a process that is contrary to Scripture. This is a failure to properly humble oneself before Almighty God.
You responded: more words representing something I do not hold to. Scripture please! :) I was very very clear that scripture does hold to belief in Christ = eternal life above.
10) Yes, that is exactly what you believe, based on your theology, Trent.
11) I wrote: The person who takes this position cannot in honesty praise and thank God for his salvation, but only that God has provided the means for that person to save himself.
You responded: umm... I don't think this merits a response. Either you do not truly understand what I believe..? Christ died on the cross for my sins or I would be going to hell... so I can't honestly praise him and thank him for my salvation??? I can do nothing but recieve the free gift of eternal life? Ok.. scripture! :)
According to your theology, Christ did not save you. He only provided the means to salvation and the rest is up to you. I am just taking your theology to its logical conclusion. But as the scriptures say quite unambiguously, that is not the case. You were unable to respond to the Gospel until God enabled to you. To say otherwise is to take credit for your salvation.
You concluded: I look forward to discussing some specific scriptures in regards to eternal life being gained with out belief in Christ as I think that was the object. I already know that Calvinism is a logical building block of beliefs, but I think it lacks and even contradicts scripture in to many ways. I think the main topic is "do you have to have eternal life to believe" so lets discuss that. Thank you for being willing to do so and I hope you figure out how to post! :)
This is a straw man. I never said that eternal life is attained without belief in Christ. We must believe, but as we are told in Ephesians 2:8 the very faith that is necessary to believe is a gift of God. Salvation is a work of God from start to finish. To say otherwise is to do no less than contend with the very Word of God. It is lacking in humility.
Trent, regarding your comment that "I know that I am saved eternally because of Christ's promise, even if I do not persevere": It is not you who persevere but God who preserves you. 1Thess 5:23-24: "Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Faithful is He who calls you, and He also will bring it to pass."
You see, Trent, we cannot take any credit for our salvation, nor for our persevering.
First of all, I said I was going to swear on a stack of bibles blah, blah, Well, I didn't! I am burned out, but you will think I was running away from the debate because I could not defend my position of regeneration before a person can believe. So here is my feeble attempt to carry on. THIS, however, WILL BE MY LAST DEBATE on the internet. I will not get myself into this situation again. And another reason I'll finish this is because you are a truly nice guy and I need to finish what I started. Soooooooooo!!!!
TRENT, YOU STATED:
"Hi Donald. :) Take a break and come back. Calvinism is easy to defend.. until you hit scripture. Then to make it easy, it requires presuppositions and turning from what clear scripture seems to be clear on IMO. I used to be calvinist because it was all I heard. Then I had someone challenge me to let Scripture speak for itself. It took time because I was very stubborn, but over time, I was convinced. "
Trent, Trent, Trent!! I'll let that statement pass because it must have just been hyperbole on your part. "Until you come to Scripture." We shall see!!
And from a previous post you said:
" What passages will you use to show that you do not have to believe to have eternal life?
You keep quitting the debate :P but at least don't leave until you defend your eternal life before you believe statement. You changed topics instead of defending it from the Bible. :) that's not like you."
Talk about putting words in someones mouth!! I NEVER said you do NOT HAVE TO BELIEVE to have eternal life? I'm not sure I can even call that a "straw man," argument since it is such an overstatement.
How about defending my position, which is that a person has to be regenerated/born from above, BEFORE they CAN believe? I maintain that a fallen, unregenerated, dead in sin, at enmity with God, depraved sinner CANNOT believe UNLESS first ENABLED to by the divine miracle and power of the Holy Spirit. THAT'S what I will defend.
Now, just a note to start. It says in John 3:8:
"The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."
I quote this verse because I want to be careful not to reduce the mystery of salvation and conversion to a mechanical sequence that can be monitored with mathematical precision. Having said that, I think we can at least recognize the principles to which God generally operates in bringing someone to saving faith. I'm not one to put God into a little black box and say this is the ONLY way salvation and conversion works. Anything is possible with God and I always try and keep that in mind.
FIRST SCRIPTURE: MATTHEW 22:14:
"“For many are called, but few are chosen.”---I'm going to state this in a different way. John and Mary are both CALLED . Both "hear" the gospel, but John is converted and Mary isn't. What is the difference internally between the two? Externally, both "heard" the call, or the Word. One is converted and one isn't.
SECOND SCRIPTURE:
1 THESSALONIANS 1:5
For our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance, as you know what kind of men we were among you for your sake. "
So the call can come externally to all. Both John and Mary "heard" it. But the Word also comes in POWER and in the Holy Spirit. The example that comes to my mind (such as it is) is something we have all experienced. You are in class and an announcement comes over the loudspeaker "A car with the license number 1234 has it's lights on." Everyone in the class heard that announcement and basically ignored it. The one person immediately KNEW, internally, that was meant for him alone. It's his car. Now that may not be a perfect analogy, but it makes the point of Matthew: Many are called, but few chosen.
The point I'm trying to make is that the external call is indiscriminate. Everyone "hears" it. The external call is meant for everyone, all people, all classes etc. It can be resisted and in most cases is. Acts 7:51.
However, the internal call of God, those CHOSEN, not just called, is a different situation. John was GIVEN the "spiritual ears," to understand the call--1 cor 2:14 and Acts 16:14. Mary was not and she was not converted.
I don't want to start listing the thousand scriptures to support my position since we are both familiar with them, and don't need to regurgitate them over and over. This has already gotten longer than I intended.
So I'm going to answer my own question. The difference between John being converted and Mary not, is simply this: God effectually called John and did not chose Mary. Any other conclusion leads to salvation by merit. It leads to, and advocates a false gospel of gigantic proportions. It says, ultimately, that God died for, well, essentially no one. It says that to make the Atonement effective depends not on the Sovereignty of God, but on unregenerated man to "make a decision for Christ." That is utter blasphemy according to scripture.
No matter how you state it, Trent, you either have salvation and conversion coming from God Alone BEFORE any lost person is enabled to believe, or you have some type of cooperation between man and God--man helping God because of some merit within one that the other does not have, instead of the position that NO ONE has ANYTHING to bring to God without that divine enablement.
In conclusion, IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JOHN AND MARY within each of them, or is the reason one is converted and one isn't, solely God's choosing? I say it is God that makes the difference without man having any part in their conversion whatsoever.
PART II
Sorry I had to post this in two parts, but I had other things I had to take care of. So Part I and Part II state my position. Of course, people have written 1,000 page books on this very subject but I'm not able or wanting to go that in depth. It isn't necessary, since the way of salvation is so clear in Scripture.
------------------------------
Again, I maintain, along with scripture, the deplorable, hopeless state of the natural, fleshly, unregenerated man. How can any one turn to God on their own, who has no spiritual life, no inclination whatsoever to seek God? In fact, not only does the natural man not seek God, he is positively an enmity with him.
I ask you, without being regenerated/born from above by the power of the Holy Spirit how can this lost, miserable soul who is in the following condition do anything toward his own salvation?
You go against the plain teaching of scripture and give man merit when he has none. Man's heart is "deceitful above all things and desperately wicked." (Jer. 17:9). His mind is BLINDED by Satan (2 Cor. 4:4) and darkened by sin (Eph 4:18), so that his thoughts are only evil continually (Gen. 6:5). His affections are totally upside down, so that he loves what God hates, and hates what God loves. His will is enslaved from good (Rom. 6:20) and hostile to God (Rom 8:7). He is without righteousness (Rom 3:10), under the curse of the Law (Gal. 3:10) and is the captive of the Devil. His condition is, should I say, about as hopeless and hopeless can get. He CANNOT work out his salvation for there is NOTHING good in him (Rom. 7:18) He then, needs that divine miracle of REGENERATION, a miracle even more miraculous than his physical birth, which he had no part in.
There is only One who can effect that change from the natural man wallowing in the kingdom of darkness, and loving every second of it, to the spiritual man living in the kingdom of light: God created man, and God Alone must re-create him. Man is spiritually dead and nothing but all-mighty power can make him alive.
It is nothing by the pride of man, against the plain teaching of scripture, that insists that man has the ability, without divine intervention first, to believe, to create their own faith (since I believe you maintain that faith is not a free gift of grace) to in effect, save themselves by "making a decision" for Christ.
As you see, I included a quote from Romans 8. Unlike the GES people and their interpretation that that passage is talking about "carnal" Christians I certainly don't agree with that assessment.
In Romans 8:1-9 there is a division stated, but it is not between carnal and spiritual Christians. It is a division between those who walk after the flesh (the unregenerate) and those who walk after the Spirit (they that are Christ's). There is no third category.
Those walking after the flesh are hostile to God. If you haven't been regenerated, you are therefore, by definition, walking after the flesh. In fact you CAN do no other. Hence, you are hostile to God.
Hi Donald. looks like I have a lot to answer :) its hard to resist I know.
"An unregenerated person, without God drawing him (Acts 6:44) (dragging, like in Acts 16:19) CANNOT come to Christ. People like to keep quoting the "Whosoever" believes, or comes etc., and that is true. Whosoever comes, comes, but the "whosoever" includes only those first drawn efficaciously by God. The "draw" does not mean common grace, previenent (i think that's the term Arnimians use) grace making it possible to come. "
You are choosing to think that the verses you quote rule out human volition which is contradicted to many times in other scriptures. You cannot ignore that portion just so that calvinism is true. God is a rewarder of those who seek him. Even the heavens give evidence of God. Gods grace is for everyone, thus to some extent all are drawn. However, different people do have different experiences I.E. Saul/Paul. Remember, Christ died not just for us but for the world!
It is clear that whosoever believes is saved, and God loves THE world. How his will works with human volition I don't know, but like the Trinity, both are clearly taught. Ignoring some verses for others is not the way to deal with it. Its also hard to discuss with you things when you jump around. I thought we were going to deal with the regeneration before belief issue first? That was your claim, I gave some verses to you, and you did not address it at all. :) Lets cover it, I am very interested as it seems thats a requirement for your theory.
Hello Dennis. Thanks for the interaction! :) Ok, let me take a look at your response here.
Dennis said "1)
This verse has everything to do with the unregenerate man. When we were in our unregenerate state, we were hostile to God and powerless to submit to God. This is obvious on the face of it. That is the clear meaning of the scripture: The mind of sinful man is death and unable to submit to God. We as believers “are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in [us].”
You did not address the context here. You made statements. I tried to point out that the context seems to be dealing with Carnal Believers, not unbelievers. You also said that "sinful man is death and unable to submit to God." define submit? The ninevites repented and were spared from God's wrath.
Dennis wrote "2)
Yes, my reference was wrong – I wrote 2 Corinthians when it is 1 Corinthians, chapter 2. My apologies. In that, Paul says that “We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” Again, Paul is speaking with the utmost clarity: Before one has the Spirit, he cannot accept the things of God. Not will not, but cannot. We understand because we have the Spirit. So, when you say that you were convinced through human means you are speaking against the scripture."
I would again disagree. Continuing into verse 3, I think he is discussing the same thing as above. Carnal Christians. 1 John discusses also the natural man and the new creature that cannot sin. We still have 2 natures. Read these verses in context from ch 2 vs1 to chapter 3 vs 17. These people who cannot comprehend are Believers. Remember Christ said "IF you love me you will keep my commandments." Loving him is not the same as having eternal life. We understand these things if we are spiritual.
3) As I mentioned to Donald, please present your evidence for being regenerate before belief. Belief is a requirement, and stating otherwise is not a good argument.
4) You did not correct the quote here, please do so so I can look it up.
Dennis said "I find your statement puzzling. You say that you pray that the Spirit will remove the blinders from the person to whom you are witnessing, yet you seem to be saying that if that is not done, this person still can respond to your message. How?"
Because I do believe that is is and can be more difficult for some people to believe then others. I do believe the Holy Spirit can be involved in it, and because the Bible teaches it. As a child, my mother shared with me about Christ and I believed. I would have believed my mom if she had told me the moon was made of cheese or Santa was real but because I believed about Christ I gained eternal life. It was easy. In India with active demonic involvment, I believe its different. I believe that if I had walked into each home, and quoted john 3:16, that there woudl have been some converts, but not 150+. It is our responsibility to spread the Gospel. There are people going to Hell right now because the harvest is plentiful but workers are few. Are they without excuse? NO, but are we? Are we giving them the same opportunities to believe that we had? NO. That is why I pray.
5) Dennis says "You continue to be wrong, Trent. Your mother told you of the promise, but according to the scriptures you were unable to recognize the truth of it. I’m not putting words into your mouth: Logically, if you say that you were able in your own power to do what someone else was unable to do, then you are claiming salvation by merit."
Making this statement does not make it true. Please show me in scripture that belief is not needed for regeneration. I will again clarify. Being convinced that something is true is not a choice, and as such is a non merit. You stating otherwise also does not make it true.
6) Dennis says "Your argumentation simply does not make sense. That the Bible says that anyone who believes in Christ has eternal life is not the issue. The issue is HOW that is accomplished. Jesus said (John 6:44) that "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him….” The word translated “draw” means to compel with superior power."
ok, lets discuss this. Show me that this means that the Father forces salvation and then you believe? You still are putting the cart before the horse. Your interpretation is based on a prior assumption. vs 35 says "he who comes to me shall never hunger and he who believes shall never thirst." it does not say he who will never hunger or thirst believes. vs 36 tehn states that their problem is they did not believe, not that they were not regenerate. John 6:47 all states belief as the deciding factor as well. It could say he who is regenerate has eternal life which although true it is not how you become regernate. vs 37 you would consider to teach that God forces those he chooses to go to heaven regardless and the rest he created for Hell. Consider it to work with Belief first. John 12:32 says "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself" is that forced? Context determines meaning I think you have to agree. This way it would not be taken as compulsive but a moral pull on one’s
life. Thus those that believe are drawn to him.
Dennis says "So we see a clear delineation of salvation: We are chosen by God (Ephesians 1), the Father draws us to Christ, and our hearts are opened by the Spirit to respond to the message. Where is the human effort in this? "
Human effort is not the issue although you keep bringing it up. I believe eternal life is gained by belief in Christ, you believe it is forced upon you, and then you have to believe. This passage has many issues in it and a lot more then just eternal life. It has to do with future rewards as well as present deliverance and forgiveness. vs 12 and 13 I believe make my point again. Heard, Trusted, and then after believing sealed. vs 19 believed. The focus even here is still believed. How that works with Gods forknowledge, I will not try and understand. Like eternity and the trinity, I do not argue that Bible teaches it. You are trying to remove Human choice, response and responsibility and do not want to deal with passages that teach it. ( it seems) This does not show regeneration before belief. Eph 2:8-9 we are saved through faith, and it is a gift, not works. we agree of course on the last part but you are arguing the first. Note chapter 4:17. these are believers he is telling not to walkthat way. This goes back to 1 Cor and the others. Chapter 5 talks about rewards and those who inherit or will not inherit in the kingdom of God. Believers can be these things!
It is a great passage to argue predestination, but that is not something I disagree with.. although we might disagree with some of our understandings. Currently the discussion was supposed to be on regeneration giving eternal life before and with out belief.
7) Dennis said "Again, Trent, you are not speaking logically. If you say that you were saved because you believed through your own human effort, you are taking credit for your own salvation. And the Bible does not say you were predestined because you believe, but the opposite: You believed because you were predestined."
How do you figure that being convinced of a truth is effort? I can try not to and still be convinced, so you are not being logical. Also, as I showed, the Bible shows belief before eternal life/regeneration. Regardless of how you look at predestination, that is the point. I believe it is based on his foreknowledge working together with our responsibility and choice.
8) Dennis wrote "I don’t know why God did things the way he did them, other than to say that if God is perfect then he is bound by his own perfection to do everything in the way that is best. I cannot conceive of God saying, “This is not the best way to do it, but I’m going to do it anyway.”
What is going on in this world is a result of him allowing us to have free will, which apparently is the best way. If you are stating everythign is his action, then God sins. You have to make a decision. Does man make choices, or are we truly robots? Adam and Eve were forced to sin then? This is one of the inconsistencies in my opinion of Calvinism. Is God the author of evil? is damning 1/3 of the angels to hell a good thing, or a result of allowing them to choose?
Dennis says "I only know what the scriptures have revealed to me. I accept what they say, and I abandon myself to the mercy of God. The scriptures say with abundant clarity that we who believe were chosen, drawn to Christ and enabled to believe. I don’t dispute that, and I am unable to understand why you do."
LOL I was going to say the same thing! I am trying to take all of it though. The passages I brought up, and the ones you did and keeping it context. Your theory requires regeneration before belief. I do not believe that is taught and in fact demonstrated the opposite. I also dealt with the scriptures you brought up. I know I do not understand everything, but I do know what some very simplistic passages that are milk teach and I work to harmonize those that are more difficult with those that are simple, not move on and ignore them. Lets narrow this down if we can again, and focus on Regeneration before belief. I have not read the additional posts below and will address them as well.
9) Dennis wrote: "It then is up to us to, ipso facto, save ourselves through a process that is contrary to Scripture. This is a failure to properly humble oneself before Almighty God. "
responded: more words representing something I do not hold to. Scripture please! :) I was very very clear that scripture does hold to belief in Christ = eternal life above.
Dennis said "Yes, that is exactly what you believe, based on your theology, Trent. "
Show me? I hold to Eternal life is by belief in Christ and nothing else. Show me how that is contrary to scripture? If you believe that is contrary to scripture, I hope you believed it at one time.. Donald I think will disagree with you on this. You have not proven that Jesus was wrong in the verses I gave, (you did not address them) nor have you proved that eternal life is given before belief. (the verses you gave can be easily understood in ways that do not contradict Jesus Christ) I look forward to your response on this one.
11) Dennis wrote: "The person who takes this position cannot in honesty praise and thank God for his salvation, but only that God has provided the means for that person to save himself. "
I responded: umm... I don't think this merits a response. Either you do not truly understand what I believe..? Christ died on the cross for my sins or I would be going to hell... so I can't honestly praise him and thank him for my salvation??? I can do nothing but recieve the free gift of eternal life? Ok.. scripture! :)
Dennis said "According to your theology, Christ did not save you. He only provided the means to salvation and the rest is up to you. I am just taking your theology to its logical conclusion. But as the scriptures say quite unambiguously, that is not the case. You were unable to respond to the Gospel until God enabled to you. To say otherwise is to take credit for your salvation."
You have said that belief in Christ does not give eternal life. I gave verses that clearly state that it does. If your theology requires that to not be true, then I think you need to review it. Thats the bottom line IMO. If you believe the Holy Spirit is involved in enabling, I have no problem with that. regeneration before belief however is contradictory to many passages. I do believe God enables or allows for anyone to have eternal life. I do not believe he disallows anyone as the logical conclusion of calvinism requires.
Dennis said "This is a straw man. I never said that eternal life is attained without belief in Christ. We must believe, but as we are told in Ephesians 2:8 the very faith that is necessary to believe is a gift of God. Salvation is a work of God from start to finish. "
and I believe that eternal life is the gift, but I understand why you believe it is not. Consider it that way and then if makes sense with Jesus's claims. I followed the logical conclusion, that if you are regenerate, and a new creature, that you have eternal life. Perhaps it would help if you spelled out the order for me so I don't misunderstand..
Dennis said "To say otherwise is to do no less than contend with the very Word of God. It is lacking in humility."
If I misunderstood, I apologize. and I think perhaps I misaddressed some things above.. My understanding is that you believe a person is born again and regenerate before they believe. That would mean they have eternal life with out believing, correct? Please clarify. My position is that a person is regenerate and born again at the moment he believes in Christ.
To make this more on topic, you believe people will be in hell because God created them to go there. Only if they were created to go to heaven will they avoid it. I know its a simplification, but it is the "logical" conclusion if I understand you correctly.
Thanks for this, and I am going to do some more reading in Eph again. Its been a while since I have addressed the predestination issue. :)
Grace and Truth
Trent
Donald, I dont know if I will get to yours today, I have a new job but I will review them. :)
Dennis, you said "Trent, regarding your comment that "I know that I am saved eternally because of Christ's promise, even if I do not persevere": It is not you who persevere but God who preserves you. 1Thess 5:23-24: "Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Faithful is He who calls you, and He also will bring it to pass."
You see, Trent, we cannot take any credit for our salvation, nor for our persevering."
Amen, God preserves me regardless of my actions, I totally agree, and that was my point. I look to his promise to me, not any of my promises or actions for him. But when I am spiritual, I strive for the inheritances set aside for those who remain faithful as 1 Pet Challenges us!
Good clarification!
Peace and Truth
Trent
Donald, I just perused the first part. :) I admit I might have used a little more "challenging" language to hopefully get you to continue :D
I am glad it worked. I am going to review your 2 posts when I have the time to give it the attention it deserves. :D
Trent:
I'm at work so this will be brief.
I don't follow your reasoning here. I point out in many, many verses that you have to be regenerated/born again from above, and you must be enabled by the Holy Spirit before you can believe or even realize there is anything or anyone to believe in.
YOU SAID:
"You are choosing to think that the verses you quote rule out human volition which is contradicted to many times in other scriptures. You cannot ignore that portion just so that calvinism is true."
That is a false assertion. The passages speak plainly to the issue at hand, which is: How can the natural man, before being enabled by the power of the Holy Spirit, believe? And likewise, you cannot ignore scriptures that show your position is incorrect. Your position, that man by his own volition, before being born again, can believe, is pleasing to man and man-centered, but totally unbiblical.
YOU SAID:
"God is a rewarder of those who seek him."
ROMANS 3:10-12--As it is written:
"There is no one righteous, not even one;
11there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one."[a]
You are avoiding the issue. How can an unregenerated person, dead in trespasses and sin, seek God?
YOU SAID;
"It is clear that whosoever believes is saved, and God loves THE world."
Once again, you are avoiding the issue. No one is maintaining that "whosoever believes is saved."
Everyone without exception that believes will be saved. I don't disagree with that.
Trent, explain to me how someone believes before they are born again, since the scriptures say that is impossible with man.
I'm not jumping around. It just seems like that because you keep avoiding the issue. As long as you refuse to answer, on biblical grounds, how the natural man, by his own will is able to believe, there is no point going on.
Now, you asked for scriptures and I provided a few. Please deal with them. I provided these scriptures:
"You go against the plain teaching of scripture and give man merit when he has none. Man's heart is "deceitful above all things and desperately wicked." (Jer. 17:9). His mind is BLINDED by Satan (2 Cor. 4:4) and darkened by sin (Eph 4:18), so that his thoughts are only evil continually (Gen. 6:5). His affections are totally upside down, so that he loves what God hates, and hates what God loves. His will is enslaved from good (Rom. 6:20) and hostile to God (Rom 8:7). He is without righteousness (Rom 3:10), under the curse of the Law (Gal. 3:10) and is the captive of the Devil. His condition is, should I say, about as hopeless as hopeless can be. He CANNOT work out his salvation for there is NOTHING good in him (Rom. 7:18) He then, needs that divine miracle of REGENERATION, a miracle even more miraculous than his physical birth, which he had no part in."
Those scriptures show the hopeless state of the natural man and the impossibility of believing before being born again.
I guess we are at the point of having to agree to disagree.
Hey Donald, I am going to address your last before your prior since its a bit shorter. :)
HEB 11:6 But without faith [it is] impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
So Faith must be present before pleasing as well as he is rewarder of those who seek him.
Donald sais "I don't follow your reasoning here. I point out in many, many verses that you have to be regenerated/born again from above, and you must be enabled by the Holy Spirit before you can believe or even realize there is anything or anyone to believe in."
I think I adressed them all but you did not address my points or the verses that state belief first. If I missed one lets review.. if you brought them up below I will comment. But even as you state your point, you are not saying what you said before, and that is that regeneration or being born again is prior to belief. That is what I am challenging.
Donald said "That is a false assertion. The passages speak plainly to the issue at hand, which is: How can the natural man, before being enabled by the power of the Holy Spirit, believe?"
If it was plain, we would not be disagreeing. :) I feel Jesus is clear as well. Why is it that overwhelmingly the bible points to the responsibility of you or I to believe if in fact it is not a choice for one to consider. Man is either chosen and regenerate and will believe or he cannot? Thats like me holding you responsible for us being in Iraq. :) You have no control so its silly.
donald said "And likewise, you cannot ignore scriptures that show your position is incorrect. Your position, that man by his own volition, before being born again, can believe, is pleasing to man and man-centered, but totally unbiblical."
show me which one I have ignored? Thus far I believe I have addressed each. brought up ones that contradict regeneration before belief, and took your thoughts to their logical but unpalatable conclusions and those you do not want to discuss. ( by the way, please don't read tone into this. :) a little frustration, but all friendly. I know you have some of the same)
Donald Quoted "ROMANS 3:10-12--As it is written:
"There is no one righteous, not even one;
11there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one."[a]
all includes you and I. By the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified. vs 9 shows he is including himself in this. Not even Paul the apostle, so again, this does not rule out nor contradict Heb. This does not support regeneration before belief. What it does is prove my point in vs 22. I recieve and Paul recieves the righteousness of Christ by believing. As I continue to point out, belief is always the point, not those who have eternal life will believe.
Donald says "You are avoiding the issue. How can an unregenerated person, dead in trespasses and sin, seek God?"
I said
"It is clear that whosoever believes is saved, and God loves THE world."
donald says "Once again, you are avoiding the issue. No one is maintaining that "whosoever believes is saved."
Everyone without exception that believes will be saved. I don't disagree with that.
Trent, explain to me how someone believes before they are born again, since the scriptures say that is impossible with man."
Where does it say that it is impossible for a man to believe before he is born again? I think thats something you are reading into it.. or I missed the verse.
Donald says "I'm not jumping around. It just seems like that because you keep avoiding the issue. As long as you refuse to answer, on biblical grounds, how the natural man, by his own will is able to believe, there is no point going on. "
As I seem to continually repeat, I do not believe you "WILL" to believe. That is impossible to do with anything. You are convinced something is true regardless of your will. If you don't want to believe something, then it takes more convincing. What I am trying to do is get you to see the logical conclusion of what you are saying and not addressing. The Bible says whoever believes has eternal life. It does not say that some cannot have eternal life, or that God created people and angels just to damn them. THat is the logical conclusion of what you are stating, and you have not backed it up IMO. The verses I have gone over in context seem to be easily understood with in the context of what I am stating. A believer even paul and live carnally and be separated from God. An Unbeliever like Cornelius can want to find God.. want to please him, even though he is not able to with out belief.. and others will respond IF they hear the gospel and may not if they don't. Remember Nicodemus was held accountable for not understanding scripture before he was saved.
Now, you asked for scriptures and I provided a few. Please deal with them. I provided these scriptures:
I don't follow your reasoning here. I point out in many, many verses that you have to be regenerated/born again from above, and you must be enabled by the Holy Spirit before you can believe or even realize there is anything or anyone to believe in.
YOU SAID:
"You are choosing to think that the verses you quote rule out human volition which is contradicted to many times in other scriptures. You cannot ignore that portion just so that calvinism is true."
That is a false assertion. The passages speak plainly to the issue at hand, which is: How can the natural man, before being enabled by the power of the Holy Spirit, believe? And likewise, you cannot ignore scriptures that show your position is incorrect. Your position, that man by his own volition, before being born again, can believe, is pleasing to man and man-centered, but totally unbiblical.
YOU SAID:
"God is a rewarder of those who seek him."
ROMANS 3:10-12--As it is written:
"There is no one righteous, not even one;
11there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one."[a]
You are avoiding the issue. How can an unregenerated person, dead in trespasses and sin, seek God?
YOU SAID;
"It is clear that whosoever believes is saved, and God loves THE world."
Once again, you are avoiding the issue. No one is maintaining that "whosoever believes is saved."
Everyone without exception that believes will be saved. I don't disagree with that.
Trent, explain to me how someone believes before they are born again, since the scriptures say that is impossible with man.
I'm not jumping around. It just seems like that because you keep avoiding the issue. As long as you refuse to answer, on biblical grounds, how the natural man, by his own will is able to believe, there is no point going on.
Now, you asked for scriptures and I provided a few. Please deal with them. I provided these scriptures:
Donald says "Those scriptures show the hopeless state of the natural man and the impossibility of believing before being born again."
"You go against the plain teaching of scripture and give man merit when he has none. Man's heart is "deceitful above all things and desperately wicked." (Jer. 17:9). His mind is BLINDED by Satan (2 Cor. 4:4) "
We addressed this. I already told you that I understand that the Holy Spirit can be involved with the revelation of Truth. but I do not believe it is forced. If they do not want to listen.
and darkened by sin (Eph 4:18), so that his thoughts are only evil continually
since in context these are believers, how does this prove that unbelievers cannot believe before regeneration?
" (Rom. 6:20) and hostile to God" Yes, these are believers! Context context! this shows that a believer can be separated from God. Not eternally as is also clear, but in relationship and blessing. That is what we have discussed some about the place of forgiveness.
" (Rom 8:7). He is without righteousness " this passage I think would be worthy of study. However if you read the whole chapter, he is dealing with believers. Believers who in vs 12 are told if they live in the flesh they will die. vs 17 gives a reward for us if we suffer with Christ. vs 6 to be carnally minded is death.. these are believers so I don't see this as a proof text but I do want to look at it further.
"(Rom 3:10), under the curse of the Law " covered above
"(Gal. 3:10) and is the captive of the Devil. His condition is, should I say, about as hopeless as hopeless can be. "
This chapter I see as further proof of Belief giving eternal life. 3:2,6,7,8,9. However the main f ocus then is not eternal life for unbelievers, but in vs 1 reminding them the truth! 2:16! we have believed in Christ that we might be justified! Belief first again!
Donald said " He CANNOT work out his salvation for there is NOTHING good in him "
Yes, that is why the only way to have eternal life is belief in Christ. You know we agree with that.
Donald says "(Rom. 7:18) He then, needs that divine miracle of REGENERATION, a miracle even more miraculous than his physical birth, which he had no part in."
Again, this is Paul, a believer who has nothing good dwelling in him. How does that prove an unbeliever must be regenerate before he believes?
Please address my logical conclusions of your points, and thank you for doing the scripture. Romans Ch 8 I think is the most interesting even in context has some challenges for me to consider but the others I don't see as at all relative to our discussion, and one that is more challenging compared to the dozens that are so clear that belief proceeds life? :)
Thank you again for this being important enough to discuss and I will reveiw and respond to your other 2 when I can. I thought this would be short LOL.
Love in Christ
Trent
Trent:
This is getting so long it is getting out of hand. If you don't mind, we can go over your last post paragraph by paragraph.
I'm at work and will answer the first paragraph of your post tonight or tomorrow.
You said:
"Hey Donald, I am going to address your last before your prior since its a bit shorter. :)
HEB 11:6 But without faith [it is] impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
So Faith must be present before pleasing as well as he is rewarder of those who seek him."
Also, you said:
"I think I adressed them all but you did not address my points or the verses that state belief first. If I missed one lets review.. if you brought them up below I will comment. But even as you state your point, you are not saying what you said before, and that is that regeneration or being born again is prior to belief. That is what I am challenging."
So I will deal only with this part first. Then we can go on to the next. Maybe that way it can keep the discussion more to the point.
If this is not agreeable with you, let me know.
TRENT:
HEB 11:6 But without faith [it is] impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
-----------------------------------
That is a great scripture and I agree with it completely. However, I'm not sure what it has to do with regeneration before faith/belief.
It goes through the list of the great people of faith and says that their works are pleasing to God. Absolutely. In fact the scriptures say that works without faith are sin. That shows what value God places on the works of His people. Works done by Born Again Christians are, indeed, pleasing to God.
Trent, you said that I'm not saying what I said before. That is incorrect. If in posting from work in a hurry or for some other reason, I said something different other than regeneration precedes faith, I apologize, because that would be a misstatement on my part. You cannot believe before the Holy Spirit enlightens you/regenerates you, and you receive the gift of faith which enables you to believe.
I maintain, and will continue to maintain, because I am supported by the whole of Holy Writ, that before a person can see the Kingdom of God he must be born again. In John 3:3 it is not believe then be born again. When asked how this is possible, Jesus responds, you must be born of water and the Spirit. Even this verse, to me, is crystal clear.
Do you have to have faith to have eternal life? Of course you do, and when regenerated you are given that faith as a free gift, through the grace and mercy of God.
The fact that we are passive in regeneration is evident when Scripture refers to it as being "born" or "born again" (cf. James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:3; John 3:3-8). We did not choose to be made physically alive and we did not choose to be born -- it is something that happened to us; similarly, these analogies in Scripture suggest that we are entirely passive in regeneration.
This sovereign work of God in regeneration was also predicted in the prophesy of Ezekiel. Through him God promised a time in the future when he would give a new spiritual life to his people:
26A new heart will I give you and a new spirit will I put within you, and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
27And I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you shall heed My ordinances and do them. EZEKIEL 36:26-27.
When Jesus speaks of being "born of the Spirit" (John 3:8), he indicates that it is especially God the Holy Spirit who produces regeneration. But other verses also indicate the involvement of God the Father in regeneration: Paul specifies that it is God who “made us alive together with Christ" (Eph 2:5; cf. Col 2:13). And James says that it is the "father of lights “who gave us new birth: "Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth that we should be a kind of first fruits of his creatures" (James 1:17-18).
Finally, Peter says that God "according to his abundant mercy has given us new birth ...through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3, ). We can conclude that both God the Father and God the Holy Spirit bring about regeneration.
When I say that regeneration comes "before" saving faith, it is important to remember that they usually come so close together that it will ordinarily seem to us that they are happening at the same time. As God addresses the effective call of the gospel to us, he regenerates us as we respond in faith and repentance to this call. So from our perspective it is hard to tell any difference in time, especially because regeneration is a spiritual work that we cannot perceive with our eyes or even understand with our minds. (Scriptural passages John 3:5; John 6:44, 65; Acts 16:14; Eph 2:4-5; Col 2:13)..
So you challenge me, Trent, and I will answer to the best of my ability (which isn't saying much). I'm no theologian, just a average person occupying a pew on Sunday mornings.
I'm trying to keep this short. Oh, and you say I haven't responded to your scriptures. It's not that I am ignoring them, but it's probably because I've done so much debating etc, recently, I've lost track of what verses you are talking about, specifically. So respond to my verses, and tell me which one you want me to respond to.
But remember, all the verses you use as proof-texting, talking about believing, or faith etc., always come with the question: HOW are you enabled to believe. What is it within you that makes you different than the person next to you that didn't believe? If it is something you did, or something within you, then you are preaching salvation by merit/works.
Trent, take your time to answer all of this, because I know there is a lot to cover. But since I have some time, I wanted to respond to some comments you made a few posts back.
YOU SAID:
"I think it tells you what it means in the next sentence. water is born of flesh. If its not, there are millions of people including the criminal on the cross who believed in Christ yet will be in hell because they did not undergo water baptism. you are looking at one passage in John that according to your interpretation contradicts dozens of other passages. If it does, then you have to reinterpret all the others to say believe means be baptized, and that is definitely not in the text. Why not use the clear and easy passages to help understand the harder.. though IMO thats not hard since he does explain, and then explains exactly what a person must do to have eternal life in john 3:16. If Baptism was required for eternal life, John 3:16 would be written differently. I know you are discussing this on the grace church forums, and have avoided getting involved there, but you did bring it up."
You are referring to the John 3:5 passage. I meant to ask you what you meant by saying ""I think it tells you what it means in the next sentence. water is born of flesh."
You say baptism isn't mentioned in the verse. For the sake of argument, I'll say OK. But the verse certainly doesn't say, and the entire bible never says, that water means flesh. I mean, if anything, it would refer to a "spiritual cleansing," like it meant in the OT.
I don't, and never have, maintained that one absolutely has to be baptized to be saved. I have said that is the normative means provided, but it certainly doesn't mean if you are not baptized, you end up in hell.
The passage speaks clearly for itself. Nicodemus asks how can one be born again and Jesus says you must be born of water and Spirit. You don't need to go to any other verse. Jesus tells him exactly what must be done.
Then, instead of taking what Jesus said in his response, you say go to John 3:16. That's fine, but why go there when Jesus has already explained how to see the Kingdom?
So John 3:16 says "whosoever believes in him..." Exactly right! Whosoever believes will be saved. No one is disputing that, as mentioned before.
Trent, the question is (and I'm getting tired of repeating it) how do you think a unregenerated person can believe so as to be saved, unless they have been first enabled to do so? With man it is impossible, but with God all things are possible.
How to explain regeneration is answered by John 3:8.
One other point, I wanted to mentioned. You keep emphasizing the following point:
"How do you figure that being convinced of a truth is effort? I can try not to and still be convinced, so you are not being logical."
Now, Trent, I have seen that statement many times in the literature of the GES and it has always left me puzzled.
I don't understand the point of that statement when you are referring to one's salvation.
Sure, if you are talking about something in the secular world, such as you are convinced that 2 times 2 equals 4, then I see the point of that statement. Although, in many things it takes massive amounts of effort to believe something is true.
However, when you use that statement to refer to salvation, then it is total nonsense.
What it does is beg the question and obscures the main issue:
How can a person that is wallowing in the kingdom of darkness be "convinced" that the Spiritual things of God are true, when the Scriptures say repeatedly that without first being drawn, or enlightened by the power of God, it is impossible to discern spiritual things.?
According to the bible you can't possibly be convinced of the truth of the scriptures, unless your mind has been opened by being regenerated first so you can understand.
I know that is a totally repulsive concept to man, but Holy Writ is crystal clear on this.
OK, I've said my piece.
Peace be with you
TRENT:
This is just posted as food for thought, since you seem to think that Romans 8:7-8 refer to something called a "Carnal Christian."
"Although the carnal Christian heresy may be a perfect match for our hedonistic, self-centered, relativistic, materialistic, man-worshiping culture, it is a deadly, soul-destroying, blasphemous teaching. It denigrates God by teaching that unholy, unrepentant, self-idolaters have fellowship and favor with the thrice holy Jehovah. It denigrates Christ by teaching that His merits (i.e., His precious blood and life) are ineffectual in changing human hearts. It denigrates the Holy Spirit by teaching that the Spirit of holiness cannot effectually apply Christ's atoning death to the elect. It denigrates the Church by teaching that she comes to the wedding feast with soiled and defiled garments. How can professing Christians adhere to a teaching that says one can be a truly saved person yet not love Jesus Christ. 'Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, 'I know Him,' and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him' (1 Jn 2:3-5). 'If you love Me keep My commandments' (1 Jn. 14:15)"
comments by Brian Schwertley
P.S. You don't need to take the time to respond to this, since I would bet you totally disagree with the sentiments expressed. I just happened to run across the comment and put it here so you can see there is a lot of disagreement with that whole concept.
Question? If Calvinism is true when it states only the "Elect" (chosen of God) are enabled "to believe" after being regenerated; then "how?" can anyone say any doctrine... [Quote:...is a deadly, soul-destroying, blasphemous teaching.]
Non-elect souls are DEAD regardless which belief they subscribe too!
While the "Elect" would never (supposedly) subscribe to a "soul-destroying doctrine".
We even have a church here in our community that has those in attendance who are staunch 5-point Calvinists but they themselves claim to be convinced they are the "non-elect"ones??
Go figure!
< www.CalvinistChurch.com >
Hi Donald. I hope you are doing well, and keeping less busy then I. One point I wanted to bring up.
You said ""Although the carnal Christian heresy may be a perfect match for our hedonistic, self-centered, relativistic, materialistic, man-worshiping culture, it is a deadly, soul-destroying, blasphemous teaching. It denigrates God by teaching that unholy, unrepentant, self-idolaters have fellowship and favor with the thrice holy Jehovah."
First, no way it teaches that they have fellowship or favor. Your are mixing up your theology with what it is saying. They are not in fellowship or in favor. That is the issue.
Second, its what does the Bible teach about it? If these are carnal Christians, then they are whether we like it or not. It means it is not a proof text for regeneration before belief.
As far as the rest, your argument seems to be based on dead in sins meaning they cannot believe. Thus you have people who are non elect and going to hell regardless of being held accountable for something they cannot do, then you have those who are regenerate and elect yet have not believed, and then those who are regenerate, and believed.. though why they had to believe does not seem clearly spelled out. Thus, belief is not nessecary for eternal life, only that God Chose you, and forced some to be his, and some he created to damn. That is the result regardless of the terms used to make it seem nicer.
It appears we will have to disagree. I appreciate you spending the time to try and spell it out, but I have to think it goes against the clear teaching of Christ, and also against the justness and love of God.
I know I have eternal life because I believe and that is the sole condition given by Christ.
Peace and Truth
Trent.
Abercrombie, you said "Non-elect souls are DEAD regardless which belief they subscribe too! "
I think you point out Donalds difficulty. It sounds like you are requiring election for eternal life based on your understanding of a few passaages, where as the Bible clearly gives the condition of belief in Christ for eternal life.
I have eternal life because I believed in Christ, and I know I have it, because I know I believe NOW.
Thank you for visiting, and my apologies for being sporadic
Grace and Truth
Trent
Hi Trent:
MATTHEW 1:21--"And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins."
Notice, He shall his people FROM their sins, not in them.
1 THESS; 4:1-7--"
1Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more.
2For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus.
3For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:
4That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour;
5Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God:
6That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified.
7For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness."
First of all, that was a quote from Brian Schwertley, not my remarks, although I certainly tend to agree more with him than those that, almost gleefully, advocate something called a "carnal Christian."
Secondly, there are two divisions of people in the world: the lost and the saved. Not three divisions: the lost, the Christian, and the carnal Christian.
Personally, I think two mistakes are made by people on both extremes. On one extreme are those that confound or mix justification and sanctification. Or to put it another way, who can't seem to separate Law and Gospel. Those are the legalistic morons, and they are not only a pain to deal with, but preach a false gospel. On the other extreme are those that totally separate justification and sanctification. Those are the Antinomianins. It's the old heresy of Nicolaitan Gnosticism. I'm telling you, some people's kids just never get it. They also preach a false gospel, like most people on the extremes of anything.
I find it bordering on blasphemy to glorify "carnal Christians." The scriptures throughout Holy Writ exhort us to glorify God and lead lives of Holiness and obedience. Of course, as Luther said, we all sin every day. True enough. But for one to pretend to be Christian while leading a life that cannot not be distinguished from the lost, is absurd. One who makes a habit of sin and doesn't even pretend to follow the example of Christ, is to me, a false professor, a hypocrite, repulsive, obnoxious to fellow Christians, and, basically, for lack of a better term, an idiot. Babble all you want about the poor, pitiful, carnal Christian, but that person had better check his premises.
2 TIMOTHY 3:1-5:
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away."
Note, especially, verse 5. "Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof."
As an aside, it is worthy of note that in the book of Acts the word savior is mentioned twice. The word LORD is mentioned 92 times. Gives one pause for reflection.
I only brought up that quote because I have noticed how saturated the GES writings are in giving predominance to the so-called "carnal Christian." It's like using that concept as fire escape insurance from hell." Hey, who needs to live a life of holiness? I mean, I mumbled some magic words about "believing" one time 60 years ago and I was "saved." Now, of course, I'm an atheist, a drunkard, a wife-swapper, a child molester, a murderer, and even worse--a democrat, but guys, ya know what!!! It doesn't matter. I burped out the words "I believe," and I'm in like flynn. What do I say to that? Well.....THROW UP!!
Now, for the real issue. I would have to write a 5,000 word essay if I tried to address all the misconceptions in your remarks about the plan of salvation. I'm not going to do that, and we can agree to disagree (which does not mean I accept our positions as morally equivalent) because I have stated over and over again the plain teaching of scripture, and it is either ignored, or not understood. I realize these things are spiritually discerned. However, how one can deny the teaching that man has NOTHING to contribute to their salvation and furthermore, CANNOT contribute anything to their salvation, and have nothing to contribute in the first place, is beyond my comprehension. We'll leave it where Holy Writ leaves it--with God Alone!!!
Finally, and this is the last word since nothing I say matters, you have it exactly backwards--wrong if you will. Trent, you do not have eternal life because you believe. You believe because you have eternal life.
Good Grief!! Let me ask you one more time. HOW can a lost person who is spiritually dead in trespasses and sin (Eph 2:1), by his own innate ability (which he does not have, John 6:63), correctly understand and interpret Spiritual truth--1 Cor. 2:14--in order to savingly believe?
YOU SAY:
"As far as the rest, your argument seems to be based on dead in sins meaning they cannot believe."
Of course that's what the scriptures mean. Spiritually dead means dead. Not 20 per cent dead, or just a little sick, but deader than a door nail. Fallen man is in an utterly hopeless state and cannot do anything to change that. It is impossible for man. Like it or not, fuss and fume at God if you must, but the fact is, get over it!!!! Man can to nothing to help God save him. How could he? He not only is helpless, he is at enmity with God. He hates God, is anti-God, can's stand the idea of God, can't even seek the TRUE GOD. He can only grovel around in the dirt and make idols and worship the creature, not the Creator.
Enough of this I BELIEVED, see how great I am. Change the song around The fallen, depraved man sings "How great I am," instead of 'How Great thou Art."
I find it the height of arrogance to maintain that puny, worm of a man, fallen, unregenerated, lost, at war with God, can think he can "believe" without being enabled by the power of the Holy Spirit. Eph. 2:5.
I've said it until I'm blue in the face and won't repeat it again. I pray that you Arminians ask to have your minds opened, as the Holy Spirit did for Lydia, so as to understand what is spiritually discerned.
I don't say this to be mean spirited, but out of great love for people. I desire ALL to be saved and come to a knowledge of God.
Romans 5 explains why those not born again are doomed to hell. They are sinners and are held accountable, that's why all are born under a death sentence. We are all unworthy, guilty, God-hating, unregenerate sinners, before the miracle of the New Birth, which is performed without our contribution. We didn't even contribute anything in our physical birth, let alone in the divine miracle of the New Birth.
Away with all this prattle about man contributing anything toward their own salvation, or of taking a baby step toward their salvation, or helping God with their salvation. All of that, without exception, is nonsense, God-dishonoring, and blasphemous.
Paul, in Romans, deals with these false accusations against God when he is discussing the Potter and the Clay; some made for HONOR and some made for DISHONOR. Who in the world are we, says he, to question God. THAT, my friend, is the height of ignorance. That is something you would expect to come from the pea brain of someone an enmity with God.
I thank God every day the He is in charge of the salvation department, and not me. I've said my final piece. You won't agree and I know that. All I can say is check the scriptures daily to find the truth.
Peace be with you, as I sign off for good from these discussions. Generally speaking, they are a terrible waste of time.
DONALD
Donald, I for one appreciate your heart-felt burden for others and myself as an "Arminian" (although I myself prefer the term "Biblicist" and deny subscribing to either the errors of Arminism or Calvinism. ) But for the sake of discussion & your point of view: If I am one of the "non-elect" of God's vessels of wrath destined to destruction to His glory, then your appeal for me to believe is falling on deaf ears that will never hear! Correct? On the otherhand, if I am one of God's Elect then whether I agree with you or not on whether... "I believe because I have Eternal Life or I have Eternal Life because God convinced me He is not a Liar!" I am assured of Eternal Life with God! Just hoping this will ease your burden and sense of frustration for those of us that are not caught in the "conundrum of calvinism."
You are so kind to appreciate my frustration with those that seem to think God needs their help in order to save them. I'm glad that at least there are some in the world that recognize the utter futility and absurdity of that concept. Glad to hear you are not one of them.
You said you prefer the term "Biblicist" -- whatever that means. Actually I prefer no labels at all. They are entirely too misleading, in most cases.
I fully understand the errors of those that think man can contribute something to their salvation, no matter by what label they go by.
As for Calvinism, I'm with those that do not like that term either.
As for the term Biblicist, it is about as inane as the other labels. Do you really think any Christian would deny that they get their theology from the bible alone?
You say:
If I am one of the "non-elect" of God's vessels of wrath destined to destruction to His glory, then your appeal for me to believe is falling on deaf ears that will never hear! Correct?"
You are correct. If you are a vessel of wrath fitted for destruction, no amount of my appealing to you to understand the gospel will do any good. If the Holy Spirit doesn't enable you to understand Spiritual things, anyone could beg, plead, and badger you from now until dooms day, and it would be a waste of time. Actually it's worse than you say. The appeal would fall on DEAD ears, as opposed to deaf ears, that would never hear. I give you credit for seeing that. Most don't. They continue to believe that they somehow have something to contribute to their salvation. Like "accepting Jesus into their heart," and other such nonsense. Poor God. He can only be a partial redeemer, or a partial mediator between God and man, unless a fallen, depraved, dead in trespasses and sin, unregenerate person, who is at enmity with God, decides, out of the depth of their desperately wicked heart, to "accept" Him.
Good Grief!!! When will man stop trying to glorify himself and give the glory to the Thrice Holy God.
I'm a little surprised by your statement that "God convinced you He is not a liar." Thank God the Holy Spirit, but since I've been Born from Above, I've never had to be convinced of any such thing, since it has never entered my head that God was a liar. Only those unregenerate souls would think such a thing about God, I would think.
As usual my questions, arguments, scriptures, reasoning, etc., are ignored. So for the last time:
"HOW can a lost person who is spiritually dead in trespasses and sin (Eph 2:1), by his own innate ability (which he does not have, John 6:63), correctly understand and interpret Spiritual truth--1 Cor. 2:14--in order to savingly believe?
As for a paradoxical, insoluble, or difficult problem; a conundrum if you will, of Calvinism, that is certainly in your head. I have no problem with any of it. I see the errors of Pelagianism, semi-pelagianism, synergism and Arminianism. I see no errors in what has become known as Calvinism.
And of course, you miss the point entirely. You continue to fail to deal with what IS the main point:
HOW did you believe, How did you become CONVINCED, that God is not a liar, before you were born again? And I'm not doubting that you are born again from above, just that you had anything to do with it.
Belief, by the way, is NOT a condition or cause of your salvation. It is the result. Just like salvation is a gift of grace, so is faith. If salvation is not a gift, then man has to add something to it, which is against the scriptures. And if salvation is not a gift, then neither is faith. And we are not the author of our faith. The Author and Perfecter of our faith, is Jesus Christ according to Heb 12:2.
It seems to me that there are two kinds of people--the saved and the lost. There is nothing in between.
For those that say Christ died for everyone without exception, then explain to me why everyone without exception are not saved. None of us would say everyone without exception will be saved.
If I understand your position correctly, you say that Christ died for ALL sins of ALL men. If so, then all should be saved.
You would say, no, no those lost didn't believe. But is belief a sin? If it is, and it is, then Christ died for that sin. If Christ died for the sin of unbelief, then why would that particular sin cause one to be lost. It's a sin, and Christ died for it, according to most free will advocates.
I say, along with the bible, that Christ died for, and was a substitute for All of the sins of some men, not all the sins of all men, otherwise you have to maintain universal salvation.
From the very beginning, starting in Genesis 3:15 it is clear there are two divisions of people. The "seed of the woman," and the "seed of the serpent."
Are you saying that Christ died for the "seed of the serpent," since you maintain Christ died for all?
If so, you are pitting the members of the Godhead against each other. Christ said he came to do the will of the Father, and according to John 6:39 the will of the Father is that Jesus not lose any that were given to him. If some of those Christ died for are lost, then Jesus did not do the will of the Father, which is impossible.
Those the Father have given to Jesus do not include the "seed of the serpent." Every single person without exception that was given to the Son by the Father, has been or will be saved by the Holy Spirit. Christ did not die for anyone that is in hell, or was in hell before the Atonement.
You can have your partial redeemer, your belief in a hypothetical redeemer for hypothetical believers, but that is not for me.
I believe in a redeemer that redeems, a reconciliation that reconciles, and a propitiation that propitiates. I do not believe in a hypothetical salvation for the hypothetical believer.
Christ died for the "seed of the woman," not the "seed of the serpent." To hold otherwise is nothing but blasphemy.
whew.. been to long since I have been back. Donald, you I think have changed some views on somethings since our discussion, although not on the fact that you need to be saved before you can believe. Since you are saved before you believe, then how can you have to believe to be saved? you put salvation or eternal life before belief.
Unlike the biblical order, you have those who have eternal life believe. The bible says those who believe have eternal life over and over. It also says clearly in John 3, those who do not believe do not have life.
As I started to respond to you on the forum lets do the same here, or I can just bring it over. What is your definition of belief? Mental assent or understanding something to be true, or more then that and if more, why?
If a mother tells her 5 year old that Santa Claus is real, he or she believes her. You state, that if the same mother, tells her child that if they believe in Jesus Christ for eternal life they get it, that they cannot?
Since it is natural for a child to believe his mother at that age, you have 2 choices. Either all children who are told at a young age are elect, or God disallows and specifically creates some people for Hell.
As we both don't want to get bogged down, lets focus first on your definition of belief, then take one scripture at a time to discuss. You can pick the first. :)
Oh, and to clarify or remind, belief is not a choice, it is being convinced something is true. learning about something, being open minded or choosing to meditate or listen is a choice that can lead to belief, but you can be convinced of truth and believe something even against our will.
Ask Saul..erm Paul. You could also ask mothers of soldiers killed in battle if you can be convinced against your will.
So how can a sinner believe Jesus Christ offers eternal life to all who believe?
The same way we hopefully all did. We were convinced it was true.
Why do young people get saved often, and old people seldom? Because they are convinced easier. Not because they become less elect at they get older.
You are so kind to appreciate my frustration with those that seem to think God needs their help in order to save them.
We agree that the Scriptures do not teach that "...GOD needs any help in order to save".
You said you prefer the term "Biblicist" -- whatever that means.
Bib·li·cist -ˈbɪblÉ™sɪst -Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[bib-luh-sist] Pronunciation Key -
–noun
Primarily used of a person who interprets/understands the Bible literally.
Actually I prefer no labels at all. They are entirely too misleading, in most cases.
agreed. but then we need words and labels to communicate
I fully understand the errors of those that think man can contribute something to their salvation, no matter by what label they go by.
Agreed. However, I do not view or teach that "belief in Christ's integrity and/or credibility" as helping GOD or contributing to one's salvation.
As for Calvinism, I'm with those that do not like that term either.
I understand, yet it is a recognized term that we may conveniently use, to simply save on words, to identify a system of interpreting Scripture (a system of which I happen to strongly disagree.)
As for the term Biblicist, it is about as inane as the other labels.
Biblicist is no more or less insignificant, empty, insipid, meaningless, or silly than the word "inane" itself. It is merely a term, like Arminianism, or Calvinism, or Pelagianism, that denotes/defines a unique system or view of interpreting Scripture.
Do you really think any Christian would deny that they get their theology from the bible alone?
Yes, unfortunately I have met several "professing" believers. Generally they are of the charismatic/pentecostal persuasion
You say:
If I am one of the "non-elect" of God's vessels of wrath destined to destruction to His glory, then your appeal for me to believe is falling on deaf ears that will never hear! Correct?"
You are correct. If you are a vessel of wrath fitted for destruction, no amount of my appealing to you to understand the gospel will do any good. If the Holy Spirit doesn't enable you to understand Spiritual things, anyone could beg, plead, and badger you from now until dooms day, and it would be a waste of time.
Check out www.CalvinistChurch.com
Actually it's worse than you say. The appeal would fall on DEAD ears, as opposed to deaf ears, that would never hear. I give you credit for seeing that. Most don't.
Kind of like Adam & Eve, and Cain after the fall of mankind, correct?
They continue to believe that they somehow have something to contribute to their salvation.
Romans 4.5 & 16; Romans 11.6
Like "accepting Jesus into their heart," and other such nonsense. Poor God. He can only be a partial redeemer, or a partial mediator between God and man, unless a fallen, depraved, dead in trespasses and sin, unregenerate person, who is at enmity with God, decides, out of the depth of their desperately wicked heart, to "accept" Him.
Agreed. Those of us that seek to interpret and understand the Bible literally and consistent with it's self(i.e. biblicists) recognize that "faith in faith" is a heresy. In fact, we recommend a booklet, SEVEN REASONS NOT TO ASK JESUS INTO YOUR HEART!
SEVEN REASONS NOT TO ASK JESUS INTO YOUR HEART!
Good Grief!!! When will man stop trying to glorify himself and give the glory to the Thrice Holy God.
Interesting "oxymoron" you used there, (Good Grief?) But your exclamation seems inconsistent with your view. Why would you expect otherwise from unregenerate, vessels of wrath fitted for destruction, etc.???
I'm a little surprised by your statement that "God convinced you He is not a liar."
Amen! My wife & I thank Him everyday!
Thank God the Holy Spirit, but since I've been Born from Above, I've never had to be convinced of any such thing, since it has never entered my head that God was a liar.
Only those unregenerate souls would think such a thing about God, I would think.
Again, how from your perspective could these unregenerate, vessels of wrath fitted for destruction, deaf souls, etc. think otherwise?
Bob Wilkin said people's sins are paid for and people go to Hell for not believing in Christ.
But what about the people who go to Hell who have never heard of Christ?
They go to Hell for their sins. The payment for their sins is not applied to them until they believe in Christ.
Since Jesus died for the sins of the world, not ours only, I would say that even those who have not heard end up in the lake of Fire because they do not have life. Jn 20:30-31 Those that seek him he will reveal to.. the problem is those who do not seek, but are open if we were to share, that is why the harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. We need to reach those! Those who have not heard are still without excuse because creation calls out the Glory of God and if they call out to him, he will reveal himself to them. He draws all men to himself. :) Thoughts?
Grace and Truth
Trent
Why do they not have life?
Jn 20:30-31 and Jn 3:16-18. At the moment of belief. Also in Revelation at the Great White Throne, after being judged according to their works.. they are checked to see if their name is in the book of life. That is the determining factor. Their works determine their wages, but not where they go.
They have not life because they have sin, and they have sin because they have not life.
You can't say nobody goes to Hell for sin. Everybody who goes to Hell goes there for sin.
I agree, ultimately sin is the cause. But since Jesus paid the price for all Sin, how can we pay for it by going to Hell? If we have Jesus, we have life. The new creation that we now have and become cannot sin. (read 1st John) that is what will end up in eternity.
Grace and Truth
Trent
If you can go to hell for sin, then salvation isn't by grace alone. It means that your eternal destination is determined by your obedience (works), and if it is by works, it is no longer grace.
The determinating factor is grace alone. Or, to be more specific, God Alone. We love Him because He first loved us, not the other way around.
If sin could sin you to hell, then salvation would not be by grace alone, but by works (obedience).
If salvation were based on anything outside of Christ, then we would all be doomed. If we are "in Christ," it means we are not "in ourselves."
Salvation is by grace alone, plus NOTHING!!
Well Said Truth!
Well Said Truth!
Trent said...
I agree, ultimately sin is the cause.
OBJECTIVE TRUTH said...
If you can go to hell for sin, then salvation isn't by grace alone.
Potentially billions of people DO go to hell for sin.
And yet salvation is by grace.
So, quit saying people don’t go to hell for sin.
Need I show you websites saying people go to hell for sin?
Are those websites wrong about that?
The point is that if Jesus died for the sins of the world, and he paid in full for it, how can someone else pay for it? Jn 3:16-18 with Jn 20:30-31 makes is clear why someone will be in the Lake of Fire. If they did not believe, they do not have Eternal life or God's life. If they do not have that life then they are condemned based on that. We do not gain eternal life by doing good works, and in the same way, we do not end up in the Lake of fire because of bad works either. I hope I explained it better brother. :) If the Bible does not say we will be in the Lake of fire because of our works, then I don't care about the websites. :) But, ultimately, if there was not sin, then no one would be in the Lake of fire so that is valid.. But its not based on a persons individual sin. I know its weird because of how so many Christians talk, but its God's word that takes priority! Talk to you soon!
Grace and Truth
Trent
Trent said...
But, ultimately, if there was not sin, then no one would be in the Lake of fire so that is valid..
Trent said...
God's word that takes priority!
The ultimate doesn’t take priority? How could it be the ultimate if it doesn’t take priority?
Sin was the causative factor. Because Adam Sinned, the human race was doomed to pay the ultimate price. Then Jesus paid the price for the Sins of the world. Now no one needs to end up in the Lake of Fire, but they need God's life. That life is gained by believing in the one whom God sent. Because of his death and resurrection, simply by believing in Jesus Christ, his life is gained Jn 20:30-31. Anyone who ends up in the Lake of fire will do so because they don't have life, not because of their sin.
Grace and Truth
Trent
Hey, you haven't posted my comment about sin payment and life being two sides of the same coin yet.
When was the Christ's payment for sin accomplished? When is it applied to the sinner?
When was Christ's substitution for our lives accomplished? When is it applied to the sinner?
When was the Christ's payment for sin accomplished? When is it applied to the sinner?
Rom 5:8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 1 Jn 2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.
This seems to make it clear that it was accomplished at the cross and is effective for everyone. The only test for eternal life in Jn and Revelations is do you have LIFE? That life is gained at the moment of belief. The saints of the Old Testament had faith, but the once and for all sacrifice had not yet taken place. When it did, they left Paradise and went to heaven. The issue of the Blood of Jesus only being in effect after belief or for the elect IMO is a reformed belief that seems to have crept into most churches. What scripture would you point to that implies that the blood of Jesus only washed away the sins of believers?
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! Jn 1:9
Here’s the comment you didn’t post:
You’re saying that the payment for sin is already applied to everyone? If the payment for sin is already applied to everyone, life is already applied to everyone. They are two sides of the same coin.
If Christ’s payment for sin was applied to everyone at the cross, it was applied to Adam and Eve and thus they never sinned and thus no one has ever sinned.
You say the Bible says people go to hell because they have not life, but the Bible also says people go to hell because they have sin.
I disagree and say they are not to sides of the same coin because not everyone has life, but Jesus died for the sin of the world, not ours only. What scripture makes you think that they are the same?
Lets look at Adam and Eve first. They had LIFE. They lost it when they sinned. They believed in the future provision for their sin, the coming Messiah, but until Jesus died on the cross to cover their sin, they had to wait in Paradise. Once Jesus dies for their sin, they could join him in heaven to await the end times. Now lets talk about scripture that says people go to the lake of fire because of their sins. Which verse do you want to discuss? I will agree with you that they go to the lake of fire because they are not perfect. If they were perfect, they would not need God's life. Romans is clear though that no one is.
By the way, thanks for the interaction! Its good to get the juices flowing. Iron sharpens iron!
What is justification?
Just as if I had never sinned.
When was justification accomplished?
At the cross.
When is justification applied to people?
When they believe on Christ.
Thus the payment for sin is applied to people only when they believe on Christ.
Ok, lets look at this. You said What is justification?
Just as if I had never sinned. and a few other logical assumptions based on this one
I have heard this often, but I think a better definitions is "Declared Righteous" Its a legal term like saying paid in full. That's different then saying just as if you had never sinned. Payment was made at the cross for the sins of the world, but at the moment of belief, you are declared righteous, and you gain God's life. With out God's life, you cannot be righteous, and again, I point out Romans. Romans would not be true as far as perfection being enough if Jesus had not already handled the sin problem on the cross. (yes its all hypothetical anyway, but its a real point) Now, lets discuss some verses. Have you read the ones I have quoted? Do you have one of your own you would like to provide to back up your view point? This is still kind of a new conclusion of mine, so I appreciate you trying to poke holes in it
Grace and Truth
Trent
According to Trent, everyone today has their sin paid for at the cross but people receive life only when they believe on Christ.
According to Trent, nobody before the cross had their sin paid for and nobody before the cross had life. Or did anybody before the cross have life? If anybody before the cross did have life, we have a case of somebody having life but not having his sins paid for, according to Trent. So, then, Trent must say that nobody before the cross had life. If nobody before the cross had life, how did some of the people before the cross end up having life while the other people before the cross ended up not having life when nobody at all had life before the cross? Did people before the cross receive life when they believed on the coming Christ? But if they did, how could they have life but not have their sins paid for? But, wait, isn’t Trent saying that everyone’s sins were paid for at the cross and the payment is applied to everybody while life was obtained for everybody at the cross but life is applied to a person only when he believes on Christ? It seems that theory works only after the cross and that nobody before the cross had either life or payment for sin applied to him, according to Trent.
Trent said…
Now lets talk about scripture that says people go to the lake of fire because of their sins.
Well, aren’t they judged for their sins at the Great White Throne? And, yes, there are some relevant verses in Romans.
Trent said…
Payment was made at the cross for the sins of the world, but at the moment of belief, you are declared righteous, and you gain God's life.
Payment is not applied to you until the moment of belief. You’re saying that the payment for sin is applied to everybody whether they believe in Christ or not. Well, if it is applied to everybody, it does no practical good to a person who has never believed on Christ. So, the payment for sin is not applied to a person until he believes on Christ.
The payment for sins and life was accomplished in the substitutionary atonement. The substitutionary atonement is not applied to us until we believe on Christ.
The Christian Teaching of Substitutionary Atonement
by Conrad Hilario
In the Gospel of John, we are told that when John the Baptist saw Jesus, he declared, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn. 1:29), which is most likely a reference to the Passover lamb.
With this connection between Jesus’ atonement and the Passover in place, we have warrant to interpret the individual elements of the Passover as alluding to the atonement. First, the Passover lamb was unblemished. This suggested that the victim needed to be innocent. Second, salvation was by substitution. The only firstborn males spared were the ones in whose families a lamb had died instead. Third, the lamb’s blood had to be applied to the doorpost for the family to be rescued.
Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! (Rom. 5:9).
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. (Rom. 3:25).
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins. (Eph. 1:7).
According to the substitution theory, Jesus’ death lifted the curse of the law, which enables believers to be freed from the law. Thus, the New Testament declares that believers in Christ are no longer under law, but under grace (Rom. 6:14).
http://www.xenos.org/essays/SubstitutionaryAtonement.htm
Let’s say Peter owes God the payment for his sins. Let’s say that Jesus paid the sin debt that Peter owes to God on the cross. But let’s say that Peter is unsaved. Is the payment for Peter’s sins applied to Peter?
How could Peter be unsaved and yet sinless?
You say that justification is not “Just as if I had never sinned” because in reality everyone already is “Just as if I had never sinned”?
If not, isn’t it obvious that payment for sin is part of justification? If payment for sin is not part of justification, isn’t the only conclusion that everyone is “Just as if I had never sinned”?
Wow.. you have been busy. :) Ok.. lets see. first lighting boy said According to Trent, everyone today has their sin paid for at the cross but people receive life only when they believe on Christ.
According to Trent, nobody before the cross had their sin paid for and nobody before the cross had life. Or did anybody before the cross have life? If anybody before the cross did have life, we have a case of somebody having life but not having his sins paid for, according to Trent. So, then, Trent must say that nobody before the cross had life. If nobody before the cross had life, how did some of the people before the cross end up having life while the other people before the cross ended up not having life when nobody at all had life before the cross? Did people before the cross receive life when they believed on the coming Christ? But if they did, how could they have life but not have their sins paid for? But, wait, isn’t Trent saying that everyone’s sins were paid for at the cross and the payment is applied to everybody while life was obtained for everybody at the cross but life is applied to a person only when he believes on Christ? It seems that theory works only after the cross and that nobody before the cross had either life or payment for sin applied to him, according to Trent
ok, help me out here. Are you saying that Jesus did not die for the everyone's sin at the cross? Since until Christ's death believers were stuck in Paradise, I think there was a difference before the sins were paid for, don't you? Please clarify your statement so I know where you are coming from. If you don't believe Jesus died for the sins of the world, what scripture will you reference. If you do but you believe it just did not do anything for them, then reference that. (if you did reference below I will deal with)
Ok, great white throne. no, they are judged according to their works, but where they go is based on whether their name is in the book of life, because as the word states, our righteousness is as filthy rags. No one is good enough to earn it.. but because of Jesus's death it is theoretically possible inspite of Adam's sin. Thats what Romans is about.
Your next point about whether it matters that someone's sins are already paid for, I say its important because with out that, belief would not give life.. and I don't know and neither do you what would have happened to unbelievers if Christ had not died for the sins of the world. The bible does not say. Will the Lake of fire be the same for humans as for fallen angels and demons who he did not die for?
dealing with the scriptures you brought up.
Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! (Rom. 5:9). --- Read vs 10. "for if when we were Gods enemies we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more having been reconciled shall we be saved through his Life." Does that not sound like what I am saying?
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. (Rom. 3:25). This is a better one for your argument, but again, I would say that justification is being declared righteous. In a court room, this takes place AFTER the work has been done and price has been determined and in some cases paid already as well.
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins. (Eph. 1:7). forgiveness of sins is a relation ship issue, not a destination issue, so this is not addressing the issue.
According to the substitution theory, Jesus’ death lifted the curse of the law, which enables believers to be freed from the law. Thus, the New Testament declares that believers in Christ are no longer under law, but under grace (Rom. 6:14). this is excellent. Those who have not believed are still under the law as their task master. The only way for one to "gain eternal life" is to earn it. Of course once we believe, we have Christ's perfection. Now we are under grace.
LIghting boy said "Let’s say Peter owes God the payment for his sins. Let’s say that Jesus paid the sin debt that Peter owes to God on the cross. But let’s say that Peter is unsaved. Is the payment for Peter’s sins applied to Peter?
How could Peter be unsaved and yet sinless?"
First, we are saved and we are not sinless. Again, you seem to be arguing that Jesus did not die for the sins of the world. Since he died for the sins of the world, he even died for the Sins of Peter before he believed in Jesus, however Peter if he had not believed in the Messiah would have been under the law and responsible for every tot and tittle, and thus would never gain the life required that is only gained by Believe in Jesus Christ. The only condition for gaining Life is belief in Jesus because the sin issue was already resolved by Jesus. The Life issue is resolved as soon as we believe in him for his promise to all who believe. wheww..
Grace and Truth
Trent
We agree that the payment for sin was accomplished on the cross and eternal life was accomplished on the cross.
We agree that eternal life is applied to a person only when he believes on Christ.
I say payment for sin is applied to a person only when he believes on Christ. You say payment for sin was applied to everyone at the cross.
We can agree Adam had everlasting life applied to him when he believed on Christ.
I say Adam had payment for sin applied to him when he believed on Christ. Do you say Adam had payment for sin applied to him a) before he was created b) when he believed on Christ c) at the cross?
After all, if payment for sin was applied to mankind at the cross, that means that all of mankind has it applied to them back to Adam. And thus, Adam and everyone else never sinned. How could they have sinned? "I sinned!" "No, you didn’t!"
Trent said…
ok, help me out here. Are you saying that Jesus did not die for the everyone's sin at the cross? Since until Christ's death believers were stuck in Paradise, I think there was a difference before the sins were paid for, don't you? Please clarify your statement so I know where you are coming from. If you don't believe Jesus died for the sins of the world, what scripture will you reference. If you do but you believe it just did not do anything for them, then reference that. (if you did reference below I will deal with)
Yes, Christ died for everyone’s sin at the cross. But it doesn’t do unbelievers practical good. It’s just common sense.
Christ died for the sins of everybody in mankind, past, present and future. Mankind includes the Old Testament people. So, the Old Testament saints were ultimately saved even if they didn’t go to Heaven right away. Salvation is basically the same in all ages or else you get away from Dallas Theological Seminary Free Grace theology into Mid-Acts Dispensationalism or King James Only-ism or whatever.
c: at the cross. You are missing my point. All of the verses I pointed to, seem to state that the reason someone goes to heaven is because they have life eternal, and if they don't, its because they don't have Life. Though I agree they will receive the penalty for their actions as will we, it is not the determining factor of where they will go. Even the verses you gave easily are understood in that way. Did Jesus die on the cross for the sins of the world? What does that mean? According to you it is only effective for those who believe so he did not pay for the sins of those who did not which means why say he died for them? While we were YET sinners, Christ died for us. What does that mean? Thanks for the great interaction!
Grace and Truth
Trent
Lightninboy said "Yes, Christ died for everyone’s sin at the cross. But it doesn’t do unbelievers practical good. It’s just common sense.
Christ died for the sins of everybody in mankind, past, present and future. Mankind includes the Old Testament people. So, the Old Testament saints were ultimately saved even if they didn’t go to Heaven right away. Salvation is basically the same in all ages or else you get away from Dallas Theological Seminary Free Grace theology into Mid-Acts Dispensationalism or King James Only-ism or whatever."
agree with everything you said here except most dispensationalist I think still believe old testament believers were saved by faith, just less specific. Even Chafer later qualified his statements that way.
Grace and Truth
Trent
Trent said…
Ok, great white throne. no, they are judged according to their works, but where they go is based on whether their name is in the book of life, because as the word states, our righteousness is as filthy rags. No one is good enough to earn it.. but because of Jesus's death it is theoretically possible inspite of Adam's sin. Thats what Romans is about.
The Last Judgment
by Pastor Lee Roberson, D.D.
All sins will be brought to light, for remember, these are sinners who have not had their sins covered by the blood of Jesus. They know nothing of God's gracious forgiveness; therefore, every sin will be brought out to face them.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Books,%20Tracts%20&%20Preaching/Printed%20Books/Golden/sgdb-chap_13.htm
Christian Messenger
THE GREAT WHITE THRONE JUDGMENT
MAN’S ACCOUNTABILITY
Those who stand before the Great White Throne have never been saved in their lifetime and will learn that it is too late for sins to be removed.
On the cross He took the place of the guilty sinner, bore his sins and received all the judgment due to him and thus satisfied, by His death, every just demand of a holy God against him. In the PRESENT the risen and exalted Son of God sits on the right hand of God, able and willing to save every sinner who trusts Him definitely as His own personal Savior, and owns Him as the Lord of his life.
(Revelation 20:14) “And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire”. Death and hell have to do with sin and a fallen humanity.
To die unsaved, in your sins, is to miss having your name written in the book of life. Now judgment and its execution must take their course.
http://www.christianmessenger.org/whitethronejudgment.htm
Glimpses of Grace
God will declare to be right before Him only those who believe. God will not grant the righteousness necessary to enter heaven to anyone until it is received by personal faith.
http://glimpsesofgrace.org/articles/GreatWhiteThrone.htm
Rapture Ready
The "dead, small and great" refers to those who have lived throughout history and, regardless of their stature or position, died without acknowledging and accepting The Lord Jesus' payment for their sins. All remains of these deceased will be raised and united with their souls so that they can stand in a resurrected form before the Great White Throne.
http://www.raptureready.com/abc/great_white_throne.html
The Great White Throne Judgment vs. the Bema Seat
If a person is not saved and dies in their sin, they will be judged at the "Great White Throne judgment" following the Millennium.
Since all of us are sinners, if a person has not turned their life over to Jesus and accepted Him as their personal Savior and the Lord of their life, they will remain unforgiven, and will spend the rest of eternity paying a sin debt that they can never pay off (because a sinner cannot pay for sin, any more than a poor man can pay a steep fine). If a person does not have Jesus as their Defense Attorney, they will be found guilty and will be cast into Hell. No person stained with sin can enter Heaven; only those with pure white robes of righteousness, which can only come from Jesus Christ, can enter Heaven.
http://jeffjenkinsocala.blogspot.com/2008/12/great-white-throne-judgment-vs-bema.html
Trent said…
Your next point about whether it matters that someone's sins are already paid for, I say its important because with out that, belief would not give life.. and I don't know and neither do you what would have happened to unbelievers if Christ had not died for the sins of the world. The bible does not say. Will the Lake of fire be the same for humans as for fallen angels and demons who he did not die for?
Here you are arguing that mankind’s sins were paid for at the cross. I agree that the payment for mankind’s sins is paid for by Christ, but I say the payment is not applied to accounts until belief in Christ. What good does application at the cross do to unsaved people? No good. Any good from the cross is applied only at belief in Christ. How can you disagree with this?
Yep, but the purpose of this blog is to question popular doctrines that may not be inline with scripture. I do not disagree that many people have stated and argue this point, but does scripture support it?
Grace and Truth
Trent
lightninboy said "I agree that the payment for mankind’s sins is paid for by Christ, but I say the payment is not applied to accounts until belief in Christ. What good does application at the cross do to unsaved people? No good. Any good from the cross is applied only at belief in Christ. How can you disagree with this?"
I don't know what the application does, or what it has done. suggestion is that Scripture seems to state it that way regardless of our understanding of the reason. I am open to being wrong. Why did God put the tree of life in the garden of Eden? what good did it do? It appears none, yet it was there anyway. Perhaps Jesus blood was effective for all Sin because it had to be. His blood could not only pay for some sin. *shrugs* lets keep discussing. :)
Grace and Truth
Trent
Trent said...
dealing with the scriptures you brought up.
Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! (Rom. 5:9).
All right, we’re justified by His blood. But we aren’t justified until we believe on Christ, are we?
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. (Rom. 3:25).
All right, we have the substitutionary atonement work for us when we have saving faith.
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins. (Eph. 1:7).
All right, we have redemption and the forgiveness of sins through His blood. But we don’t have redemption until we believe on Christ, do we?
According to the substitution theory, Jesus’ death lifted the curse of the law, which enables believers to be freed from the law. Thus, the New Testament declares that believers in Christ are no longer under law, but under grace (Rom. 6:14).
All right, believers are not under the law and sin. But nonbelievers are.
Trent said…
However Peter if he had not believed in the Messiah would have been under the law and responsible for every tot and tittle, and thus would never gain the life required that is only gained by Believe in Jesus Christ.
It sounds to me like an unbeliever who is under the law and responsible for every jot and tittle does not have Christ’s payment for sins applied to him.
Trent said…
The only condition for gaining Life is belief in Jesus because the sin issue was already resolved by Jesus. The Life issue is resolved as soon as we believe in him for his promise to all who believe. wheww..
All right, tell me how one believes in Jesus.
I am going to answer your second post first because its easier. The others I am going to have to consider. 1 timothy 1:16. You believe in him for his promise and you receive it.
Believing in Jesus Christ if he had not died for our sins and made the payment was not enough. Romans, even if someone could theoretically be perfect still would not be enough because of the Sin issue. Because Jesus died on the Cross, Paul can discuss the impossibility of being good enough to make it based on merit. With out the Blood of Jesus, you could not. Does that make sense?
Grace and Truth
Trent
All right, we’re justified by His blood. But we aren’t justified until we believe on Christ, are we?
we agree on that
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. (Rom. 3:25).
Reading this starting in 3:19 and the focus again on earning eternal life, I still think this works especially with the other scriptures but I can see it saying what you are saying as well. Think of a scripture where they are focusing on eternal life. Is there one that talks about the blood of Jesus is NOW working for you? It appears what you are saying is "Jesus died for you, BUT it only applies if you believe in him" The problem is the Bible says "he died for the sins the world, Not just ours" look at 1 Pet 3:18 He died so that he might bring us to him. His death accomplished something for everyone.
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins. (Eph. 1:7).
Forgiveness is not an eternal life issue, but a fellowship issue. 1Jn 1:9 so I am not sure this is speaking of eternal life or not.. though we have been redeemed by his blood that is a good point. Have unbelievers been redeemed but don't have life. Ok interesting point here.
We are not redeemed from the lake of Fire until we believe, I agree with you there.
According to the substitution theory, Jesus’ death lifted the curse of the law, which enables believers to be freed from the law. Thus, the New Testament declares that believers in Christ are no longer under law, but under grace (Rom. 6:14).
Jesus Death also paid for the sins of the world. It accomplished much. :) it was the perfect sacrifice.
All right, believers are not under the law and sin. But nonbelievers are
Actually, no one is put under the law, it has been done away with. Only those who put themselves under it are under it right? Believers sometimes do it as well.
Some good points here though and I need to consider it some more. :)
Grace and Truth
Trent
OK, I want you to consider what this verse means in context and what its purpose is in the Bible. 1Jn 2:2
Trent said...
c: at the cross. You are missing my point. All of the verses I pointed to, seem to state that the reason someone goes to heaven is because they have life eternal, and if they don't, its because they don't have Life.
You may have a point here. Would explain why Old Testament saints didn’t go to Heaven until the cross. Would explain why the sins of Old Testament saints were, uh, what would be the description, covered over.
On the other hand, the Old Testament saints didn’t go to the bad part of Hades and they ultimately had eternal life which was obtained for them by Christ on the cross.
You say the Old Testament saints didn’t have eternal life. So, was it possible to lose your salvation in the Old Testament?
Trent said...
Did Jesus die on the cross for the sins of the world? What does that mean? According to you it is only effective for those who believe so he did not pay for the sins of those who did not which means why say he died for them?
The "T" in the word TULIP is for Total Depravity.
The second letter in TULIP is for Unconditional Election.
The third letter in TULIP is for Limited Atonement.
The fourth letter in TULIP is for Irresistible Grace.
The fifth letter in TULIP is for Perseverance of the Saints.
There’s a difference between saying TULIP and saying that Christ’s payment for sin is applied only upon belief in Christ.
Trent said...
While we were YET sinners, Christ died for us. What does that mean? Thanks for the great interaction!
You’re saying that before the cross everybody was a sinner and after the cross nobody is a sinner?
Trent said...
agree with everything you said here except most dispensationalist I think still believe old testament believers were saved by faith, just less specific. Even Chafer later qualified his statements that way.
We are familiar with Hyperdispensationalism and Mid-Acts Dispensationalism requiring works for Old Testament salvation, but also King James Version Only Baptists can require works for Old Testament salvation. And a main difference between them is one group doesn’t practice baptism and the other group does.
I don't think so because then it would be something they did.. also, Samson would have lost it if anyone could that we know positively is in heaven right now. :)
My point was the L in Tulip. My understanding is that you are suggesting that Christ's blood is only effective for those who believe. It is slightly different yet ends up being the same it seems as saying Jesus only died for the elect. If he did not die for them its limited.. and if he died for them but it does not effect them unless they believe, is that not similiar? thoughts?
Grace and Truth
Trent
Trent said...
Yep, but the purpose of this blog is to question popular doctrines that may not be inline with scripture. I do not disagree that many people have stated and argue this point, but does scripture support it?
I say scripture supports my position and the position of
Pastor Lee Roberson, D.D.
Christian Messenger
Glimpses of Grace
Rapture Ready
Jeff
better than it supports your position.
I suspect the reason you are arguing about this in the first place is you got it from Bob Wilkin and he got it from Zane Hodges or something like that. The fact is that the Grace Evangelical Society can be a cult of personalities and only as useful as its management lets it be useful.
THE DECEITFULNESS OF SIN
Sin earns and pays wages - Rom. 6:23 Sin insists on paying, and pays in kind.
Sin pays in installments, pays in full, and sin is self executive... it pays it owns debts. If you doubt this, then ask Achan, Samson, Lot, King Saul, or Eli!
http://www.watke.org/resources/Deceitfulness_Sin.htm
Yep, I’d say anybody cast into the Lake of Fire isn’t enjoying having Christ’s payment for his sins applied to him.
Trent said...
I don't know what the application does, or what it has done. suggestion is that Scripture seems to state it that way regardless of our understanding of the reason. I am open to being wrong. Why did God put the tree of life in the garden of Eden? what good did it do? It appears none, yet it was there anyway. Perhaps Jesus blood was effective for all Sin because it had to be. His blood could not only pay for some sin. *shrugs* lets keep discussing. :)
Jesus’ blood was effective for all sin of mankind but it is applied only to believers or else we’d be Universalists and liberal Christians who think that God loves everybody and has saved everybody.
All right, tell me how one believes in Jesus.
Trent said...
I am going to answer your second post first because its easier. The others I am going to have to consider. 1 timothy 1:16. You believe in him for his promise and you receive it.
All right, how does one believe in Jesus and what is His promise?
Bob Wilkin likes to beat around the bush and tell people to believe in Jesus without ever telling people how to believe in Jesus. You want to play that game too?
Trent said...
All right, we’re justified by His blood. But we aren’t justified until we believe on Christ, are we?
we agree on that
All right, justification is by His blood and is applied to us only at saving faith. What else is by His blood? The substitutionary atonement, redemption and the forgiveness of sins. They are also applied to us only at saving faith.
lightninboy said "I say scripture supports my position and the position of
Pastor Lee Roberson, D.D.
Christian Messenger
Glimpses of Grace
Rapture Ready
Jeff
better than it supports your position.
I suspect the reason you are arguing about this in the first place is you got it from Bob Wilkin and he got it from Zane Hodges or something like that. The fact is that the Grace Evangelical Society can be a cult of personalities and only as useful as its management lets it be useful."
Lightnin I actually don't know their stance on this topic and was enjoying the discussion. I do not remember what triggered this thought but it was probably reading through 1 Jn and some of the other verses discussed. You may note, that although you have quoted many people who you apparently agree with, I am trying to use scripture. What is your opinion in 1 Jn 2:2. What it means in context and why John wrote it? Why do you believe what you believe?
Lightninboy, you are setting up a strawman. IF jesus died for the Sins of the world, not ours onl, (1jn 2:2) and yet people go to the lake of fire because they do not have Life, then they are getting the natural consequences of their sin, not God's judgment. If my wife cheated on me, and I accepted her forgiveness, it does not mean that she would not get a STD for example. I am not saying I understand everything, like the trinity for example, but if the Bible teaches it, then I will believe it. Even in our lives, as believers we can confess our sins, and he will forgive us.. but that does not mean there are not natural repercussions. does that make sense?
Grace and Truth
Trent
Trent said...
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. (Rom. 3:25).
Reading this starting in 3:19 and the focus again on earning eternal life, I still think this works especially with the other scriptures but I can see it saying what you are saying as well. Think of a scripture where they are focusing on eternal life. Is there one that talks about the blood of Jesus is NOW working for you?
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.
31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
I see salvation going to people with belief, belief, belief and faith, faith, faith. Where is anything going to anybody without belief and faith?
Trent said...
It appears what you are saying is "Jesus died for you, BUT it only applies if you believe in him" The problem is the Bible says "he died for the sins the world, Not just ours"
He did die for the sins of the world and not just ours. But our sins are the only ones that get the payment applied to.
Trent said...
look at 1 Pet 3:18 He died so that he might bring us to him.
Christ died so that He might bring us to Him. Does that mean He will bring everyone to Him?
Trent said...
His death accomplished something for everyone.
Yeah, His death accomplished payment that He might bring us to Him. Does that mean He will bring everyone to Him? No, His payment is applied only to people who believe in Him.
Heb 11:11 I think makes is clear if you don't think 1 Tim 1:16 was. YOu believe something when you are convinced its true, just like in Heb 11. they believed God could fulfill his promises. Jesus promises eternal life, and I am convinced he can fulfill it. I have faith. No one on the planet needs to be explained how to believe something. you either believe or you don't You can be convinced even against your will like Paul. It appears you are getting upset, so lets agree to disagree if you prefer. I value your friendship and don't want harsh words to pass between us.
Grace and Truth
Trent.
lets discuss specific passages and see what they say like you were beginning too. Lets start with 1 Jn 2:2 as I would like to hear your thoughts on it then go to one you choose if you want to continue. Forgiveness of sins is VIABLE because of Jesus Christ, but why do we pray to Jesus for forgiveness? separate issue from eternal life. Did Nineveh receive forgiveness when they repented? God spared them even though they did not believe. why? 1 Jn 2:2 lets start with if you choose to continue and we can do so with Grace.
Brother in Christ
Trent
Trent said...
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins. (Eph. 1:7).
Forgiveness is not an eternal life issue, but a fellowship issue. 1Jn 1:9 so I am not sure this is speaking of eternal life or not.. though we have been redeemed by his blood that is a good point. Have unbelievers been redeemed but don't have life. Ok interesting point here.
We are not redeemed from the lake of Fire until we believe, I agree with you there.
Maybe in the Bible forgiveness is sometimes an eternal life issue and sometimes a fellowship issue. I have long opposed the traditional view of 1 John 1:9.
Trent said...
According to the substitution theory, Jesus’ death lifted the curse of the law, which enables believers to be freed from the law. Thus, the New Testament declares that believers in Christ are no longer under law, but under grace (Rom. 6:14).
Jesus Death also paid for the sins of the world. It accomplished much. :) it was the perfect sacrifice.
All right, believers are not under the law and sin. But nonbelievers are
Actually, no one is put under the law, it has been done away with. Only those who put themselves under it are under it right? Believers sometimes do it as well.
Brent Riggs
Are unbelievers under the law since Christ abolished the law on the cross?
So we are all “under law” in the sense that the law condemns us justly for our sin. We are all also “under grace” in the sense that the opportunity for salvation was procured for all mankind by Jesus Christ (John 3.16).
But only those who accept Jesus Christ by faith, and respond in obedience to the Gospel call are explicit beneficiaries of God’s grace.
All men are under law; all men today have access to grace; but only those who respond to Christ will receive it”.
http://www.brentriggsblog.com/2009/08/a-reader-asks-are-unbelievers-under-the-law-since-christ-abolished-the-law-on-the-cross/
Trent said…
OK, I want you to consider what this verse means in context and what its purpose is in the Bible. 1Jn 2:2
2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Christ provided the substitutionary atonement for mankind, but it is applied to mankind only upon saving faith.
I John
Chapter Two
Striking Facts: v. 1. Even the most advanced believers have their sins, but there is a distinction between them and the sinners of the world, for the former have an Advocate in heaven. As they have had Christ’s blood applied to them upon their acceptance of Him, so they have an Advocate to procure their continued forgiveness as they confess their sins.
http://biblia.com/bible/niv2011/1Jn2.2
You say the Old Testament saints didn’t have eternal life. So, was it possible to lose your salvation in the Old Testament?
Trent said…
I don't think so because then it would be something they did.. also, Samson would have lost it if anyone could that we know positively is in heaven right now. :)
So you’re arguing for there being eternal life in the Old Testament while arguing against there being eternal life in the Old Testament.
There’s a difference between saying TULIP and saying that Christ’s payment for sin is applied only upon belief in Christ.
Trent said…
My point was the L in Tulip. My understanding is that you are suggesting that Christ's blood is only effective for those who believe. It is slightly different yet ends up being the same it seems as saying Jesus only died for the elect. If he did not die for them its limited.. and if he died for them but it does not effect them unless they believe, is that not similiar? thoughts?
You’re arguing that Christ’s payment for mankind’s sin must have been applied to everyone at the cross because if it wasn’t applied to everyone at the cross and if anybody goes to Hell, Christ didn’t pay for mankind’s sin? Or you’re arguing that Christ did pay for mankind’s sin and it had to be applied to mankind on the cross? Is it possible or impossible that my position is right? If it is impossible, why is it impossible? If it is possible, why argue against it as if it is impossible? Everybody should be able to say “Christ died for my sins,” and everybody should be able to say “Christ died for everybody’s sins.” Limited Atonement can’t say “Christ died for everybody’s sins.” My position says “Christ died for everybody’s sins.” My position is not Limited Atonement.
Trent said...
Lightnin I actually don't know their stance on this topic and was enjoying the discussion. I do not remember what triggered this thought but it was probably reading through 1 Jn and some of the other verses discussed. You may note, that although you have quoted many people who you apparently agree with, I am trying to use scripture.
I don’t necessarily agree with
Pastor Lee Roberson, D.D.
Christian Messenger
Glimpses of Grace
Rapture Ready
Jeff
on everything they say, but I quoted what they said about this subject. The position of you and Bob Wilkin and Zane Hodges is not the conventional evangelical view and is heretical.
Trent said...
Lightninboy, you are setting up a strawman. IF jesus died for the Sins of the world, not ours onl, (1jn 2:2) and yet people go to the lake of fire because they do not have Life, then they are getting the natural consequences of their sin, not God's judgment.
What’s the strawman you say I’ve set up?
You say the Lake of Fire is not a judgment and is just like checking into the Holiday Inn.
Dr. Tom Malone
The very nature of God demands that God punishes sinners and that is what this great White Throne Judgment is all about.
http://fundamentalbaptistsermons.net/Site6/EBOOKS/TomMalone/The%20Great%20White%20Throne%20Judgment.htm
Ernest Angley
Because they wouldn’t accept the plan of redemption, the plan of forgiveness that Jesus died to give man, sinners will face God’s judgment.
https://www.ernestangley.org/read/article/the_great_white_throne_judgment
Pastor Jack Hyles
Those who die in their sins will be still in the grave. And it says, "They lived not again until the thousand years were finished."
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Books,%20Tracts%20&%20Preaching/Printed%20Sermons/Dr%20Jack%20Hyles/great_white_throne.htm
If Christ’s payment for sins was applied to everybody at the cross, nobody can die in their sins.
Trent said...
lets discuss specific passages and see what they say like you were beginning too. Lets start with 1 Jn 2:2 as I would like to hear your thoughts on it then go to one you choose if you want to continue. Forgiveness of sins is VIABLE because of Jesus Christ, but why do we pray to Jesus for forgiveness? separate issue from eternal life. Did Nineveh receive forgiveness when they repented? God spared them even though they did not believe. why? 1 Jn 2:2 lets start with if you choose to continue and we can do so with Grace.
As for 1 John 1:9, why pray for forgiveness if you aren’t sorry, and if you are sorry, why should you have to pray for forgiveness?
I agree with you. eternal life is only gained by belief in Jesus.
In regards to 1 Jn 2:2 then is what did his death accomplish for the unsaved? WHY is that clarification given there? Why is it that when it talks about sending people to the lake of fire, it is always based on whether they have life? What is your thoughts on that?
Lightinboy said "You say the Old Testament saints didn’t have eternal life. So, was it possible to lose your salvation in the Old Testament?"
HuH?? I did not say that.. at least I did not mean to. Since Jesus had not died for their sins, they could not go to heaven... hmm.. well, interesting, perhaps they did not have it yet technically. But I think it was a promise. That's an interesting thought. The OT does not discuss eternal life but regardless, God does not change and I do not believe that he would break a promise to them either. So whether they had it or not, they were looking forward to it. Agreed?
Trent said…
I don't think so because then it would be something they did.. also, Samson would have lost it if anyone could that we know positively is in heaven right now. :)
So you’re arguing for there being eternal life in the Old Testament while arguing against there being eternal life in the Old Testament.
see my above comment
There’s a difference between saying TULIP and saying that Christ’s payment for sin is applied only upon belief in Christ.
Trent said…
My point was the L in Tulip. My understanding is that you are suggesting that Christ's blood is only effective for those who believe. It is slightly different yet ends up being the same it seems as saying Jesus only died for the elect. If he did not die for them its limited.. and if he died for them but it does not effect them unless they believe, is that not similiar? thoughts?
You’re arguing that Christ’s payment for mankind’s sin must have been applied to everyone at the cross because if it wasn’t applied to everyone at the cross and if anybody goes to Hell, Christ didn’t pay for mankind’s sin? Or you’re arguing that Christ did pay for mankind’s sin and it had to be applied to mankind on the cross? Is it possible or impossible that my position is right? If it is impossible, why is it impossible? If it is possible, why argue against it as if it is impossible? Everybody should be able to say “Christ died for my sins,” and everybody should be able to say “Christ died for everybody’s sins.” Limited Atonement can’t say “Christ died for everybody’s sins.” My position says “Christ died for everybody’s sins.” My position is not Limited Atonement.
wow.. hard to follow some of that. So we agree that Jesus died for the sins of the world.. But you are just saying that he did not effectively do so for those who do not believe right?
INteresting.. so you will quote people you do not agree with on a position that proves our point. :) And you are stating that Zane Hodges and Bob Wilken agree with my point, and I was not aware of that so that is interesting as well. Quoting people's views is great, but the Word of God has to be our ultimate authority. My question to you then though is, HOW is this view heretical in your opinion? I do not hold that you can lose eternal life, and we both agree that eternal life is gained at the moment of belief. Please explain what you consider heretical? Again also in your own words please explain what John is saying in 1 Jn 2 and why 1Jn 2:2 is there? What is he saying?
Show me where the Lake of Fire is called a judgement? I agree the great white throne is, but they are being judged for their works. They are thrown into the Lake of Fire because their name is not in the book of Life.. i.e. they do not have eternal life. :)
Grace and Truth
Trent
Confession. 1 Jn is written about fellowship. If you are not sorry, you won't confess and then you will fall out of fellowship. Anyway, not sure where you are going, but lets save confessing sins go God for a different post. :) My point was showing that forgiveness is a separate issue then eternal life.
Trent said…
In regards to 1 Jn 2:2 then is what did his death accomplish for the unsaved? WHY is that clarification given there?
Even the most advanced believers have their sins, but there is a distinction between them and the sinners of the world, for the former have an Advocate in heaven. As they have had Christ’s blood applied to them upon their acceptance of Him, so they have an Advocate to procure their continued forgiveness as they confess their sins.
Do you agree that redemption is accomplished by the blood?
Do you agree that payment for sins is accomplished by the blood?
Do you agree that redemption is applied only at saving faith?
Thus, don’t you have to agree that the blood and payment for sins is applied only at saving faith?
Proof for the Teaching of Christian, Biblical Universalism
By Gary Amirault
There are many proofs for the wonderful teaching of the salvation of all mankind through the work of the cross by Jesus the Messiah.
Jesus "is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world." (1 John 2:2)
http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/unique_proof_for_universalism.html
Berean Bible Church
This is not teaching that Jesus propitiates for everyone's sins, but that He is the ONLY propitiation that there is. It is not speaking of universal propitiation, but of exclusiveness. In other words, there is no other propitiation other than Jesus Christ. If they don't look to Christ, there is no one else to propitiate for their sins. Jesus is the only propitiation for all the world.
So, 1 John 2:2 doesn't support universalism either.
http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/colossians/1_20.htm
Trent said…
Why is it that when it talks about sending people to the lake of fire, it is always based on whether they have life? What is your thoughts on that?
Everybody’s a sinner except the people who have the life of Christ. Everybody who doesn’t have the life of Christ goes to Hell because he’s a sinner.
Trent said...
So whether they had it or not, they were looking forward to it. Agreed?
So we agree that Jesus died for the sins of the world.. But you are just saying that he did not effectively do so for those who do not believe right?
I suppose we agree.
Trent said…
And you are stating that Zane Hodges and Bob Wilken agree with my point, and I was not aware of that so that is interesting as well.
If you are not aware of that, you are not aware of what was going on at the Grace Evangelical Society back in 2008 and 2009.
Trent said…
My question to you then though is, HOW is this view heretical in your opinion?
Ken Silva
AL MOHLER: PENAL SUBSTITUTIONARY ATONEMENT IS THE GOSPEL
We come to understand that the atonement for sin is first objectively accomplished for those who come to faith in Christ through the perfect sacrifice of Christ, and the full satisfaction of God’s righteousness. We understand that this atonement is subjectively experienced by the believer through redemption, and through union with Christ, we understand that this atonement is divinely applied by the Holy Spirit, Who convicts the soul of sin; [and] opens and quickens the eyes and the soul to see and to believe, and then sets His seal upon the believer.
http://apprising.org/2010/03/09/al-mohler-penal-substitutionary-atonement-is-the-gospel/
Reid Alan Ferguson
That one and the same death, is applied to all who believe. But it is nonetheless but one death. It is applicable to all. It is this one death the Father willingly receives in the place of all the just deaths of those who believe.
http://responsivereiding.com/re-visiting-my-thoughts-on-the-substitutionary-atonement-of-jesus-chrsit/
Moody Bible Institute
Substitutionary Atonement
According to the Scriptures, sin must be paid for.1 When Jesus Christ died, he suffered as a substitute in the place of and on behalf of fallen humanity. Christ’s death made it possible for men and women to be declared righteous, based on their faith in Him.2 Christ’s death was not merely a statement against evil or an expression of love, but a payment that satisfied God’s demand. Christ’s death was necessary for several reasons.
By laying down His own life, Jesus paid the price on our behalf, satisfying God’s demand.
God, who is rich in mercy, sent Jesus Christ to die in our place, so that He might be righteous in dealing with sin while at the same time providing His own righteousness to those who believe in Jesus Christ.16 Christ’s death was more than an attempt to reverse the human course started by Adam; it served as a substitute payment for the trespasses of all mankind.
http://www.moodyministries.net/crp_MainPage.aspx?id=646
When is God payment for sin applied to a person?
Trent said…
Please explain what you consider heretical?
It is impossible that Christ’s payment for sins was applied to everyone at the cross. Do you consider my position to be possible?
I have been out of touch and only to one conference in the past few years and don't remember everything. Regardless, I hold my views because of scripture and will change them if convinced by scripture. This is something I am not dogmatic about but seems to make sense.
Trent said…
Again also in your own words please explain what John is saying in 1 Jn 2 and why 1Jn 2:2 is there?
He who has ears let him hear
Universalism refuted
To support their teaching, Universalists quote some Bible passages from the Holy Scriptures which are the following ones: John 12:32; 2 Corinthians 5:19; Titus 2:11; 1 John 2:2; 1 Timothy 2:4; Ephesians 4:6; Romans 3:23-24; 5:18.
John says that Jesus Christ “is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the whole world” (1 John 2:2 – NKJV).
These words don’t prove that all men are saved because the apostle meant simply that Jesus Christ, through His blood, has purified us who have believed in Him from all our sins and He can purify through His blood even those who have not yet believed on Him. Yes, because in order to be purified from one’s sins one must believe in Jesus. For it should be noted that Paul said to the Romans that God presented Jesus Christ “as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood” (Romans 3:25 – NIV). Consequently, the propitiation of one’s sins is dependant upon one’s faith. In other words, a man can’t be forgiven by God unless he believes in Jesus Christ. And since Paul says to the Thessalonians that “not all have faith” (2 Thessalonians 3:2 – NKJV), we conclude that not all have been forgiven.
http://hewhohasearslethimhear.wordpress.com/2010/08/09/universalism-refuted/
Trent said...
Show me where the Lake of Fire is called a judgement? I agree the great white throne is, but they are being judged for their works. They are thrown into the Lake of Fire because their name is not in the book of Life.. i.e. they do not have eternal life. :)
If the Lake of Fire isn’t a judgment, what is a judgment?
Trent said...
I have been out of touch and only to one conference in the past few years and don't remember everything. Regardless, I hold my views because of scripture and will change them if convinced by scripture. This is something I am not dogmatic about but seems to make sense.
You said you haven’t always had this idea. And I suspect you got this idea from G.E.S., or else where did you get it?
You say that payment for sins was applied to everyone at the cross. So, everyone gets it equally, right? And what good does it do to the people in the Lake of Fire? Diddly squat. And so, what good does a payment for sins applied to everyone at the cross do for anybody and everybody? Diddly squat. And so, it’s ridiculous and heretical to even bring up the subject.
I believe jn 14:6 and jN 3:16-18 are proof enough against universalism, so I am not there. I still want to know contextually what 1 JN 2:2 is saving, and in regards to your other questions, lets discuss specific verses. I am not very interested in what a person says about their theology, but rather the scripture they get their theology from. You have quoted some verses and we have discussed some, but lets focus. Can we focus on 1 Jn 2:2 first please? I want to know how you are understanding it. The people you are quoting are not talking about the verse, they are talking around it. They are making statements that do not address the verbiage used and why it is being stated.
Lightninboy said "You say that payment for sins was applied to everyone at the cross. So, everyone gets it equally, right? And what good does it do to the people in the Lake of Fire? Diddly squat. And so, what good does a payment for sins applied to everyone at the cross do for anybody and everybody? Diddly squat. And so, it’s ridiculous and heretical to even bring up the subject. "
Yes I am saying jesus paid for ALL the sins of the world on the cross. You are saying he did not? No person is in the Lake of fire, and the people that will go there, you don't know what good it does. You keep making assumptions based outside of scripture. I think it is heretical to say Jesus did not die for the sins of the world on the cross.. and boy you are posting fast.. I have company so will respond to these as I can.
Trent
Grace and Truth.
Oh.. I see you used the word applied. Ok, please show me where in scripture that there is a difference between Jesus paying for Sins and Apply the payment?
WHY does he make such a big deal about paying for the sins of the world when he really didn't? Sounds tricky.
umm.. don't know. may have read it, reseaerched it, or maybe while studying 1 Jn. What matters is its validity. Not sure why that is so important to you. I am not a John MacArthur fan, but he does some great work on Creation. It appears you are allowing your assumption on where an idea comes from or if they hold the same belief to prevent you from considering something impartially.
You called the Lake of Fire Judgement. I asked where in scripture it was called that. You said what else can it be. Thats called assuming. I would say it is the natural residence of people who do not have life who gain their wages as it says in revelations. Since the Bible does not call it a judgement, why would you? Or if the Bible does, show me where. I am trying to get you to think instead of repeating what other people have told you.
:) Trent
on 1 jn 2:2 instead of dealing with the passage, you are attacking universalism as a strawman. I do not agree with universalism. I am asking you what you believe it means and why John said it?
Grace and Truth
Trent.
Unless you can show that there is a difference between applied and paid for, then I am going to go with it takes place at the same time. That holds with my current position. If you convince me with Scripture that it is two different things at two different times then we will go from there. I DO agree with you, that you do not gain eternal life with out belief. My question is, does the Bible teach that your sin that he paid for will send yo to hell as you say, or do you go to hell because you have not believed in Jesus and thus do not have life. John in his gospel, epistles and revelations seems clear that its because of not LIFE.
Grace and Truth
Trent
Trent said...
Can we focus on 1 Jn 2:2 first please? I want to know how you are understanding it. The people you are quoting are not talking about the verse, they are talking around it. They are making statements that do not address the verbiage used and why it is being stated.
It’s pretty simple: to understand 1 John 2:2 the way you do is to endorse Universalism.
April 27, 2013 at 10:47 AM
Trent said...
Yes I am saying jesus paid for ALL the sins of the world on the cross. You are saying he did not? No person is in the Lake of fire, and the people that will go there, you don't know what good it does. You keep making assumptions based outside of scripture. I think it is heretical to say Jesus did not die for the sins of the world on the cross.
Have I ever said Jesus did not die for the sins of the world on the cross? I said the payment for the sins of the world is not applied to people until saving faith.
You do say the payment for the sins of the world was applied to everyone at the cross. So it goes equally to everybody. And it obviously does the unsaved no good. And thus it obviously does the saved no good. A payment for sin which does no good is non-existent. So we have a non-existent payment made for the sins of everybody. So, nobody can get saved, because nobody’s sins were paid for by Christ, according to Trent’s argument if you figure the consequences of it.
Trent said...
Oh.. I see you used the word applied. Ok, please show me where in scripture that there is a difference between Jesus paying for Sins and Apply the payment?
WHY does he make such a big deal about paying for the sins of the world when he really didn't? Sounds tricky.
Refer to the arguments made against Universalism.
Trent said...
You called the Lake of Fire Judgement. I asked where in scripture it was called that. You said what else can it be. Thats called assuming. I would say it is the natural residence of people who do not have life who gain their wages as it says in revelations. Since the Bible does not call it a judgement, why would you? Or if the Bible does, show me where. I am trying to get you to think instead of repeating what other people have told you.
Great White Throne Judgment. Lake of Fire Judgment. Maybe there is a technical difference, but what difference does it make? Isn’t the Great White Throne Judgment the ultimate judgment? And if it wasn’t for sin, the people wouldn’t be there. The payment for everybody’s sins was applied to everybody at the cross? It wasn’t good enough if it was, because if the payment for everybody’s sins was applied to everybody at the cross, those people wouldn’t be there.
Trent said...
on 1 jn 2:2 instead of dealing with the passage, you are attacking universalism as a strawman. I do not agree with universalism. I am asking you what you believe it means and why John said it?
If Universalism is a strawman, how come Universalism is very relevant to this discussion?
Trent said...
Unless you can show that there is a difference between applied and paid for, then I am going to go with it takes place at the same time. That holds with my current position. If you convince me with Scripture that it is two different things at two different times then we will go from there. I DO agree with you, that you do not gain eternal life with out belief.
You say that payment for sins is applied at the cross but eternal life is not.
You say that payment for sins is not a two-stage deal but eternal life is.
You say that the substitutionary atonement is a two-stage deal. People get payment for sin at the cross and eternal life at saving faith.
I know of no place in Christendom that says the substitutionary atonement is a two-stage deal.
Trent said...
My question is, does the Bible teach that your sin that he paid for will send yo to hell as you say, or do you go to hell because you have not believed in Jesus and thus do not have life. John in his gospel, epistles and revelations seems clear that its because of not LIFE.
If a person goes to Hell for his sins, he deserves it.
If a person goes to Hell for not believing in Jesus and has never even heard of Jesus, he doesn’t deserve it.
This would be unjust of God. Thus, a person goes to Hell for his sins.
Ok, so I showed you some vs earlier that showed people going to the lake of fire because they did not have life. What verses say specifically someone goes to the lake of fire "because" of sin?
the arguments against universalism don't matter because I don't agree with universalism. Oh.. and I was thinking about things and perhaps we agree. The Lake of Fire is where people with out life go. What they recieve there is the natural results of their sin here on earth.. just like STD's are the natural result of immorality. My point is that they are not suffering God's judgement for their sin because Jesus satisfied that at the cross. Does that make more sense? Also, I will try and answer each of your posts, but can we try and cover less topics at a time? :) I have to work too.
Grace and Truth
Trent
Lightninboy said "
Great White Throne Judgment. Lake of Fire Judgment. Maybe there is a technical difference, but what difference does it make? Isn’t the Great White Throne Judgment the ultimate judgment? And if it wasn’t for sin, the people wouldn’t be there. The payment for everybody’s sins was applied to everybody at the cross? It wasn’t good enough if it was, because if the payment for everybody’s sins was applied to everybody at the cross, those people wouldn’t be there." its more then a technical difference. They are being judged whether they are good enough. Once it is determined they are not, they then are checked to see if they have Life! Then when they don't, they are cast into the lake of fire to receive their wages. 2 very different things. wages are different from judgement.
Universalism is a strawman because I do am not promoting it nor do I agree with it. It is being pulled up because of your searches on the internet. Your arguments disagreeing with me because of universalism are invalidated because it is not my conclusion.
Judgement is the evaluation of evidence in the making of a decision. white throne judgement is to determine if someone is worthy of their own to gain life. Answer will be no. Thought for you to ponder. Was death the natural result of Adam's sin or God's judgement?
I don't remember, and it does not matter. this was 5 years ago. It either stands or falls on its own merits right? :)
Jn 3:16-18 are very clear. John does not teach universalism. You are trapped into thinking that you can only think 2 ways. Please in your own words explain how and why Jn 2:2 is there and what it means in context? Why did he not just say that Christ's blood is only "applied" to those who believe? that is theology being input. No where is payment and application separated. Jesus paid for the sins of the world PERIOD. NOT just ours only. There is a clarification here. Why?
Yes, I believe your position is possible but I am not convinced from scripture at this point. I held that position initially.. well at one point I held to a reformed actually. :)
You say that payment for sins is applied at the cross but eternal life is not. correct. Payment was made once and for all and to say payment and application are different I think is adding to scripture. If I say I paid for my registration, or if I said I applied payment to my registration, I am saying the same thing. There is not a difference.
You say that payment for sins is not a two-stage deal but eternal life is.
No. Jesus Paid the price for our sins at one time, not twice. Eternal life is gained once when we believe.
You say that the substitutionary atonement is a two-stage deal. People get payment for sin at the cross and eternal life at saving faith.
No, I am saying eternal life, and Jesus paying for our sins are 2 issues. One does not immediately cause the other like universalism would teach, it is gained by belief.
I know of no place in Christendom that says the substitutionary atonement is a two-stage deal.
WHere is application and payment separated? Where does it say the lake of fire is God's judgement for sins? it is the natural result for the sinful nature that has not been quickened. Where does it say that Jesus did not "really" pay for the sins of the world, but only the elect?
If a person goes to Hell for his sins, he deserves it.
If a person goes to Hell for not believing in Jesus and has never even heard of Jesus, he doesn’t deserve it.
This would be unjust of God. Thus, a person goes to Hell for his sins.
that is logical just like the 5 pts of calvinism, but it is based on assumptions. 1st point I agree except Jesus blood paid for the sins of the world and thus since it was paid, it is not deserved. next two are just logical assumptions based on what you think about God's character and your idea of fairness. If God was fair, Jesus would not have died for us. God will reveal himself to those who search and he draws all men to himself. Anyway, lets save the unwitnessed to for another conversation. :)
Trent said...
umm.. don't know. may have read it, reseaerched it, or maybe while studying 1 Jn. What matters is its validity. Not sure why that is so important to you. I am not a John MacArthur fan, but he does some great work on Creation. It appears you are allowing your assumption on where an idea comes from or if they hold the same belief to prevent you from considering something impartially.
You’re saying I’m prejudiced against the idea that Christ’s payment for the sins of everybody was applied to everybody at the cross because the idea is yours and Bob Wilkin’s and Zane Hodges’s? I’d be prejudiced against it no matter whose idea it is.
Trent said...
Ok, so I showed you some vs earlier that showed people going to the lake of fire because they did not have life. What verses say specifically someone goes to the lake of fire "because" of sin?
Trent said...
the arguments against universalism don't matter because I don't agree with universalism. Oh.. and I was thinking about things and perhaps we agree. The Lake of Fire is where people with out life go. What they recieve there is the natural results of their sin here on earth.. just like STD's are the natural result of immorality. My point is that they are not suffering God's judgement for their sin because Jesus satisfied that at the cross. Does that make more sense?
Trent said...
its more then a technical difference. They are being judged whether they are good enough. Once it is determined they are not, they then are checked to see if they have Life! Then when they don't, they are cast into the lake of fire to receive their wages. 2 very different things. wages are different from judgement.
Suppose people are cast into the Lake of Fire because they do not have life. But why do they not have life? Because they are sinners. So, people are cast into the Lake of Fire because they are sinners. And people who have worse sin receive harsher punishment.
You just keep asking where I "got" it from and I keep saying I don't know and I don't know their stance. Anyway, its funny that to try and make your position you keep using the word applied. As a serious question, can you some where find a verse in the bible that says "Christs payment was applied when you believe" If its not in the Bible, then why are you arguing so fiercely for it?
Trent said...
Judgement is the evaluation of evidence in the making of a decision. white throne judgement is to determine if someone is worthy of their own to gain life. Answer will be no. Thought for you to ponder. Was death the natural result of Adam's sin or God's judgement?
Death is the natural result of Adam’s sin.
Trent said...
I don't remember, and it does not matter. this was 5 years ago. It either stands or falls on its own merits right? :)
Trent said...
Yes, I believe your position is possible but I am not convinced from scripture at this point. I held that position initially.. well at one point I held to a reformed actually. :)
Trent said...
You just keep asking where I "got" it from and I keep saying I don't know and I don't know their stance. Anyway, its funny that to try and make your position you keep using the word applied. As a serious question, can you some where find a verse in the bible that says "Christs payment was applied when you believe" If its not in the Bible, then why are you arguing so fiercely for it?
So you used to agree with me. So you should understand why I am arguing. Because your argument is ridiculous and makes no sense.
I agree with you on this as I posted in my original post. Ultimately, if no one had ever sinned, i.e. Adam and Eve in this case, then I agree, no one would be in the lake of fire. Sin caused death. Ok, let me try and clarify this again. Jesus Paid for Sin in regards to God's judgement. It does not erase the sin. There fore with out the new creation we get (1 Jn) at the moment of believe, we only have the old sinful creation which will end up as its natural residence (the second death) those of use who have Life! through Jesus, that new creature that according to John CANNOT sin it will be in eternity on the new earth. Does that make more sense?
Yes, I have changed my position, and you in this conversation have helped me further. Does my previous post make more sense? I am agreeing with you that people will be in the Lake of Fire for Sin, but not from God's judgement. It is because all they have is their sinful nature, not the new creation in 1 JN. The lake of fire is the natural result. You have helped clarify that. Thanks!
Please in your own words explain how and why Jn 2:2 is there and what it means in context? Why did he not just say that Christ's blood is only "applied" to those who believe? that is theology being input. No where is payment and application separated. Jesus paid for the sins of the world PERIOD. NOT just ours only. There is a clarification here. Why?
In my own words:
2:2: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.
However, 2:1 is: My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
Christ is the advocate of Christians and the propitiation for their sins. Christ is also the propitiation for the sins of everybody else. Is Christ the advocate of unbelievers? No. It is true that Christ is the propitiation of Christians. It is true that Christ is the propitiation of unbelievers. It is true that the propitiation for sins is not applied until belief in Christ. If propitiation was applied to everybody at the cross, Christ would be the advocate of everybody, but 1:1 says Christ is the advocate of Christians only.
Trent said...
Universalism is a strawman because I do am not promoting it nor do I agree with it. It is being pulled up because of your searches on the internet. Your arguments disagreeing with me because of universalism are invalidated because it is not my conclusion.
Trent said...
Jn 3:16-18 are very clear. John does not teach universalism. You are trapped into thinking that you can only think 2 ways.
Verses for Everyone Being Saved
1 John 2:2 ESV He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
This verse (above) is another case where it is difficult to put qualifications on Christ being the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. If Christ is the propitiation for only the sins of those who believe, then why does this verse add to it a propitiation for the sins of everyone else?
But each and every person who has ever lived, or who will ever live, has been forgiven of their sins. They have been justified.
http://www.newwine.org/Articles/Universalism.htm
LOGICAL AND COMMON SENSE ARGUMENTS FOR UNIVERSALISM
-If the punishment for sin was eternal torment, should not Jesus have suffered eternal torment when he died for our sins?
-Scripture says the wages of sin is death? If Jesus has already suffered for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2), Is there any sin left to be paid for? For which sins would somebody be eternally punished for?
-If Jesus died for everybody, then will not everybody be saved? John the Baptist said: "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29).
http://www.truth.info/future/universalism.htm
Are We Universalists?
Our belief is simple. We believe that Jesus died to pay for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2). We believe that He is the Savior, and the only Savior, of all men (1 Timothy 4:10). We believe that He came to take away the sin of the world (John 1:29). We believe that God has been reconciled to the world (2 Corinthians 5:19).
But we do not believe that because Jesus died for the whole world, therefore all the world is saved. Rather, Scripture teaches that though God is reconciled with the world, the world still needs to be reconciled to God (2 Corinthians 5:19-20). We believe that individuals must make a choice to believe in Christ in order to be saved. We believe that those who do not believe in Christ will suffer eternal judgment (John 3:18).
http://truthsaves.org/statement-of-faith.shtml
Jesus said in John 8:24: "I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."
Trent said...
Payment was made once and for all and to say payment and application are different I think is adding to scripture. If I say I paid for my registration, or if I said I applied payment to my registration, I am saying the same thing. There is not a difference.
Trent said...
Jesus Paid the price for our sins at one time, not twice. Eternal life is gained once when we believe.
Trent said...
I am saying eternal life, and Jesus paying for our sins are 2 issues. One does not immediately cause the other like universalism would teach, it is gained by belief.
Trent said...
WHere is application and payment separated? Where does it say the lake of fire is God's judgement for sins? it is the natural result for the sinful nature that has not been quickened. Where does it say that Jesus did not "really" pay for the sins of the world, but only the elect?
Trent said...
that is logical just like the 5 pts of calvinism, but it is based on assumptions. 1st point I agree except Jesus blood paid for the sins of the world and thus since it was paid, it is not deserved. next two are just logical assumptions based on what you think about God's character and your idea of fairness. If God was fair, Jesus would not have died for us.
5-point Calvinism can’t say Jesus died for everyone’s sins. I can. 5-point Calvinism and Trent say there is no difference between payment and application. I say there is difference between payment and application. It is foolish to say there is no difference between payment and application. I may write a check, but it may not get cashed.
Trent said...
God will reveal himself to those who search and he draws all men to himself. Anyway, lets save the unwitnessed to for another conversation. :)
You are claiming that going to Hell is the result of not accepting Christ. So, what about the unreached? This gets into the issues of the unreached heathen and the age of accountability.
And I have long been suspicious of the idea that God will reveal himself to those who search. What if there just won’t be a missionary in that land for another 400 years?
Trent said...
I agree with you on this as I posted in my original post. Ultimately, if no one had ever sinned, i.e. Adam and Eve in this case, then I agree, no one would be in the lake of fire. Sin caused death. Ok, let me try and clarify this again. Jesus Paid for Sin in regards to God's judgement. It does not erase the sin. There fore with out the new creation we get (1 Jn) at the moment of believe, we only have the old sinful creation which will end up as its natural residence (the second death) those of use who have Life! through Jesus, that new creature that according to John CANNOT sin it will be in eternity on the new earth. Does that make more sense?
Trent said...
Yes, I have changed my position, and you in this conversation have helped me further. Does my previous post make more sense? I am agreeing with you that people will be in the Lake of Fire for Sin, but not from God's judgement. It is because all they have is their sinful nature, not the new creation in 1 JN. The lake of fire is the natural result. You have helped clarify that. Thanks!
Will the Lost and Saved Stand in the Same Judgment?
by Pastor Lee Roberson, D.D.
The Judgment of the believer's sins on the cross of CHRIST. When Christ bore our sins in His own body on the cross, the result was death for Christ and justification for the believer. We are now free from condemnation and can never again be put in jeopardy. We have passed from death unto life through Christ Jesus.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Books,%20Tracts%20&%20Preaching/Printed%20Books/Golden/sgdb-chap_02.htm
Payment for sin was no more applied to everybody at the cross than was justification and life.
Gary Panell
As born again Christians we are not judged at the Great White Throne judgment. This is for the unsaved and there they are judged for every sin they have ever committed, so they can pay for their sins in hell, in degrees of punishment.
http://bible-christian.org/discussion/response53.html
Arlen L. Chitwood
John 3:18:
He who believes in Him is not condemned [is not judged]: but he who does not believe is condemned already [has already been judged (a perfect tense in the Greek text, referring to a judgment that occurred in past time — a judgment no longer occurring during present time, for the matter has been finished)], because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”
Judgment for the sin question (sin brought into existence by and through Adam’s fall in Genesis chapter three) has already occurred. It occurred in past time for both the saved and the unsaved — for the saved, with respect to belief; for the unsaved, with respect to unbelief.
For the former (the saved), they have been judged in past time, through a Substitute.
They have believed, and a Substitute (Christ) has paid sin’s penalty (death) on their behalf.
For the latter (the unsaved), they have been judged in past time as well, but apart from a Substitute. They have not believed, and there, consequently, is no Substitute to pay sin’s penalty (death) on their behalf. They will have to pay the penalty themselves. Judgment itself has already occurred, but the payment for sin’s penalty awaits.
http://bibleone.net/JSC00.htm
David J. Stewart
If a person DIES IN THEIR SINS without the righteousness of Jesus Christ, they will be punished in the fires of Hell forever. Jesus paid for our sins so we wouldn't have to. All we must do to be saved is acknowledge our guilt of sin and believe on Jesus Christ as the Son of God, our Savior, to forgive our sins and save us. All we must do is BELIEVE... “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.”
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer's%20Corner/Doctrines/hebrews_927.htm
2:1 sets the context for his audience. 2:2 widens the context. Why? what does it mean?
dying in your sins does not mean dying because of your sins. You can die of cancer, or you can die with cancer. Or, you can as 1 Jn teaches get a new body with no Cancer! thats life. Arguments against universalism don't apply because I am not going there. Its like someone telling me that because I am not reformed, I am Armenian. I am neither because the text teaches neither.
Lightninboy says "5-point Calvinism can’t say Jesus died for everyone’s sins. I can. 5-point Calvinism and Trent say there is no difference between payment and application. I say there is difference between payment and application. It is foolish to say there is no difference between payment and application. I may write a check, but it may not get cashed." writing a check does not pay for anything. Until you give it to someone its not paid. If you do give it to them, assuming its good, its paid. There is no difference. please show me a biblical reference showing a difference between sin being paid for and applied to.. shoot give me a non-biblical example. as I just showed you, the check does not work. Jesus did not write a check, he Paid the price.
As for those who do not hear, remember that God is not limited. There are stories of missionaries who show up and the tribe mentions they had a dream or someone show up and tell them someone was going to arrive and tell them about Jesus. Since God is a rewarder of those who seek him, you have to just be safe knowing his character. the challenge is for those who would respond if they heard even if they are not searching, and that is what we are responsible for.
Trent said...
2:1 sets the context for his audience. 2:2 widens the context. Why? what does it mean?
You want to say “Jesus applied the payment for sin to everybody at the cross.” But there has to be an explanation of why payment has to be applied to everyone at the cross and everlasting life has to be applied to everyone at saving faith. 1 John 2:2 is just one of the verses that Universalists use. If you’re going to harp on 1 John 2:2, we might as well harp on all of the verses that Universalists use.
So, why does payment for sin have to be applied to everyone at the cross while everlasting life has to be applied to everyone at saving faith?
Are payment for sin and everlasting life both in the substitutionary atonement?
When was the substitutionary atonement accomplished?
When is the substitutionary atonement applied?
Trent said...
dying in your sins does not mean dying because of your sins. You can die of cancer, or you can die with cancer. Or, you can as 1 Jn teaches get a new body with no Cancer! thats life. Arguments against universalism don't apply because I am not going there. Its like someone telling me that because I am not reformed, I am Armenian. I am neither because the text teaches neither.
If you die in your sins as John 8:24 warns, then you will suffer the eternal wrath of an angry God in the Lake of Fire (John 3:36; Psalm 7:11; 2nd Thessalonians 1:8-9).
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Hells_Truth/its_your_choice.htm
Sodom And Gomorrah Discovered, Tested And Verified
By David J. Stewart
2nd Thessalonians 1:8-9 tells us that God will personally take out His vengeance upon all those in the Lake of Fire. Everyone on this earth will either one day DIE IN THEIR SINS (John 8:24) or DIE IN THE LORD (Revelation 14:13).
If you die in your sins, then you will spend eternity in the Lake of Fire paying for your own sins.
We are hell-deserving sinners, which is where all Christ-rejecters will spend eternity (Revelation 20:11-15). Do you believe the Gospel? If not, repent of your unbelief and believe now, making the Gospel your hope for eternal life and forgiveness of sins. Receive Christ's payment for your sins and you will be saved eternally.
http://www.godlovespeople.com/articles/sodom_and_gomorrah.htm
People are born in sin (Psalm 51:5), and if we hold on to our sin, and do not deal with it, we will die in our sins. Since all sin must be dealt with, those who die in their sins will have to pay for their sins in hell. But if we have our sins dealt with now, on this side of death, by trusting in whom Jesus is and what He did to save us, we can avoid dying in our sins.
http://www.enduringword.com/commentaries/4308.htm
Trent said...
writing a check does not pay for anything. Until you give it to someone its not paid. If you do give it to them, assuming its good, its paid. There is no difference. please show me a biblical reference showing a difference between sin being paid for and applied to.. shoot give me a non-biblical example. as I just showed you, the check does not work. Jesus did not write a check, he Paid the price.
You want an example. Jesus Christ paying for the sins of the world. Jesus paid for the sins of the world. Is the payment applied to everybody? No.
Is Jesus Christ paying for the sins of the world part of salvation by grace?
Must salvation by grace be accepted?
Trent said...
As for those who do not hear, remember that God is not limited. There are stories of missionaries who show up and the tribe mentions they had a dream or someone show up and tell them someone was going to arrive and tell them about Jesus. Since God is a rewarder of those who seek him, you have to just be safe knowing his character. the challenge is for those who would respond if they heard even if they are not searching, and that is what we are responsible for.
You say that the only people who go to Hell are people who reject Christ?
Then, what about the unreached? Not everyone has heard of Christ, but everyone is a sinner.
THE ATONEMENT IN CHRIST
By JOHN MILEY, D.D
From its own principles the atonement of Satisfaction is necessarily efficient just as broadly as it is sufficient. The necessary elements of its sufficiency must give it efficiency in the actual salvation of all for whom it is made.
Such is the atonement of Satisfaction. From its own nature it must save all for whom it is made. It has ever waged war upon Arminianism for the denial of this causal efficiency as being a denial of the true nature of atonement. It is such that, were it for all, then all must be saved. Hence it is denied that it is for all. A limited actual salvation is ever given as the proof of a limited atonement. It is the only possible atonement. The facts of substitution in Christ necessary to an atonement must be efficient in the salvation of all whom he substitutes.
Is such an atonement sufficient for all? It is made, as maintained, on a covenant between the Father and the Son. By their consenting pleasure it is for a given number of elect souls, and no more.
http://www.gospeltruth.net/miley/mileyatonementch12.htm
Trent said…
WHere is application and payment separated?.
Yep, Trent wants to accuse me of sounding like a 5-point Calvinist, but he sounds something like a 5-point Calvinist himself.
Right.. but I am not pushing a universalist stance. I keep answering your questions and asking back but you just ask more questions. Yes, I believe Jesus Paid for the sins of the world by his death. Where biblically do you see a difference between paid and applied? Jesus's death ALLOWS for us to gain eternal life. It does not give it to us as a universalist would say. When do you believe Jesus atoned for our sins? If at the cross, why again do you see a different time for applied? I see one condition for eternal life, one condition that determines whether you have it or not clearly spelled out in multiple verses. Why we want to say Jesus's blood did not cover all sins is why I am confused. Do you see somewhere in scripture where it says the Lake of fire is satisfy God's wrath because Jesus did not cut it?
2nd Thessalonians 1:8-9 Good verse! Ok, let me study and consider that.. however it does not say "pay for your sins" as the person says. how can we pay for what Christ paid for? the Word punished is used! It does appear to be punished for not believing however, not sins. Still, good one. The other verses do not seem to say anything other then dying in your sins which I already covered above.
lightninboy said "You want an example. Jesus Christ paying for the sins of the world. Jesus paid for the sins of the world. Is the payment applied to everybody? No. "
umm.. huh? that is you stating something, its not an example. show me in the Bible or in the world, how can you pay for something but not have it applied?
LB said "Is Jesus Christ paying for the sins of the world part of salvation by grace?
Must salvation by grace be accepted?"
He already paid. We did nothing but believed in him.. Yep, Grace.
LB said "You say that the only people who go to Hell are people who reject Christ?
Then, what about the unreached? Not everyone has heard of Christ, but everyone is a sinner."
Nope, I said only the people who have not believed in Christ for eternal life. What about the trinity? I am not trying to second guess God, I am trying to understand what he teaches. You and I don't know about the unreached, we only know about the reached. Lets focus on what the Bible teaches and not speculate on something we both can only speculate on.
Trent said…
WHere is application and payment separated?.
LB says "Yep, Trent wants to accuse me of sounding like a 5-point Calvinist, but he sounds something like a 5-point Calvinist himself."
Umm.. huh? not 5 pt. I am saying that ultimately as you are separating something that is not separated in scripture.. at least not that you have shown, you are saying that ULTIMATELY Christ only died for the elect because you are separating illogically payment and application.. or at least it seems that way right now. Logically they take place at the same time. If I am missing something, lets keep talking. If you just want to believe it because you are use to it, I understand. If you pay for a car, the payment is applied OR else it was not paid for. Its that simple. IF he paid for the sins of the world, then no one else can pay for them. Again, I am talking about before God. I am not talking about the natural result of sin. Be not deceived, God is not mocked. Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. If you saw sin, you will reap death. But that's not God's punishment for the Sin. That's you sowing what you reap.
The Great Exchange
2 Corinthians 5:21
“For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”
This verse reflects the very heart of the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. Many pastors and theologians call this verse the “great exchange”. God exchanges our sin for Christ’s righteousness when we by His grace and through faith receive Him.
http://www.treasuringchristonline.com/great-exchange/
The Great Exchange: My Sin for His Righteousness By Jerry Bridges, Bob Bevington
This book is first and foremost about the gospel, the good news that Jesus Christ is the sinless sin bearer of all who are united to him by faith.
http://www.monergismbooks.com/pdfs/greatexchange.pdf
2 Corinthians 5:21 The Great Exchange
The atoning sacrificial death of Christ is sufficient for every person in the world, but it is efficient only for all who believe on Him. Every individual must decide what He will do with that sacrifice. Only those who appropriate Christ's death through faith receive His forgiveness and righteousness standing before God. Christ died for all who believe on Him. Your personal faith is an essential element in your salvation. Only the individual who places His trust in Christ receives eternal life and reconciliation with God.
http://www.abideinchrist.com/messages/2cor5v21thegreatexchange.html
Trent said...
Right.. but I am not pushing a universalist stance. I keep answering your questions and asking back but you just ask more questions. Yes, I believe Jesus Paid for the sins of the world by his death. Where biblically do you see a difference between paid and applied?
Well, it seems funny that sinners would be running around and cast into the Lake of Fire with the payment for their sin applied to them at the cross. Oh, you say there are no sinners since the cross?
Trent said...
Jesus's death ALLOWS for us to gain eternal life. It does not give it to us as a universalist would say.
That’s what I say, but what you say is that the payment for sin was applied to everyone at the cross.
Trent said...
When do you believe Jesus atoned for our sins?
I believe it was accomplished at the cross.
Trent said...
If at the cross, why again do you see a different time for applied?
Jesus's death ALLOWS for us to gain eternal life. It does not give it to us as a universalist would say.
Trent said...
I see one condition for eternal life, one condition that determines whether you have it or not clearly spelled out in multiple verses. Why we want to say Jesus's blood did not cover all sins is why I am confused. Do you see somewhere in scripture where it says the Lake of fire is satisfy God's wrath because Jesus did not cut it?
The Wrath of God
By David J. Stewart
John 3:36, “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”
God is very angry with those sinners who refuse His offer of salvation through the redemptive work of His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, Who paid our sin debt. God's offer to pardon man's iniquity on the basis of Christ's shed blood is a token of God's goodness, love and mercy. To reject such an offer, when we deserve to plunge immediately into the fires of Hell for our sins, is to spit on God's grace and tempt the hand of God.
Romans 2:5-6, “But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds.” The only escape from the holy wrath of God on Judgment Day (i.e., The Day of Wrath) is the precious blood of Jesus Christ. Romans 5:8-9, “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.” Thank God the Father for the gift of His dear Son, Jesus Christ, Who paid our sin debt.
Your Stay Of Execution will eventually expire, you will perish in your sins, and you will suffer the wrath of God's fiery vengeance in the Lake of Fire.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Hells_Truth/wrath_of_god.htm
LB, what did Jesus say you get for believing in him? Eternal life. Where does it say you get application of his blood? You seem to be missing my point as well.
LB says Well, it seems funny that sinners would be running around and cast into the Lake of Fire with the payment for their sin applied to them at the cross. Oh, you say there are no sinners since the cross?
So based on that logic, I suppose you don't consider yourself a sinner? Payment was made. What would have happened to the world if Jesus had not died on the Cross? You and I don't know, we ASSUME because of our theology that Jesus did not pay for all sins though Scripture seems clear he did. We still Sin, as do unbelievers.. but our new creation (1 jn) talks about cannot sin.
LB says "Jesus's death ALLOWS for us to gain eternal life. It does not give it to us as a universalist would say."
Exactly! That is my point! Are you beginning to understand now?
LB says John 3:36, “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”
God is very angry with those sinners who refuse His offer of salvation through the redemptive work of His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, Who paid our sin debt.
up till here, I think he makes perfect sense!
God's offer to pardon man's iniquity on the basis of Christ's shed blood is a token of God's goodness, love and mercy. To reject such an offer, when we deserve to plunge immediately into the fires of Hell for our sins, is to spit on God's grace and tempt the hand of God.
Not sure what verse he is referencing here, but nothing in the context of Jn 3!
Romans 2:5-6, “But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds.” Agreed, BUT they don't go to the LOF for their sins, but because they did not have life and were not good enough to qualify so they get what they sowed.
The only escape from the holy wrath of God on Judgment Day (i.e., The Day of Wrath) is the precious blood of Jesus Christ.
actually, the only escape as written is if you have Eternal life. We are inputting theology again here.
Romans 5:8-9, “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.” Thank God the Father for the gift of His dear Son, Jesus Christ, Who paid our sin debt.
technically you are saying he did not die for us until we are believers. thats not what this says, and Wrath does not have to be personal. that said, as you pointed out, I believe God will be angered that people did not believe in his Son. But I do not believe HE will punish for sins because Jesus paid the price and I still don't see where you have shown me where Paid is different then applied.
Your Stay Of Execution will eventually expire, you will perish in your sins, and you will suffer the wrath of God's fiery vengeance in the Lake of Fire. stay of execution? fiery vengeance? then Christ did not pay for their sins IF that is in regards to their sin. But they are dying in their sins as I said before. God's wrath is for his rejecting his Son yes.
Anyway Brother, like I said, I am not a universalist, and I do not believe your position is Heretical, I just think its wrong. :) we can agree to disagree. I really think that near the top though you are at least understanding my position.
Trent said...
2nd Thessalonians 1:8-9 Good verse! Ok, let me study and consider that.. however it does not say "pay for your sins" as the person says. how can we pay for what Christ paid for? the Word punished is used! It does appear to be punished for not believing however, not sins. Still, good one. The other verses do not seem to say anything other then dying in your sins which I already covered above.
What will happen at this judgment? (2 Thess. 1:8-9)
"Dealing out" = giving. "Retribution" = a just punishment; a penalty that is deserved.
There are two classes of people who will experience this retribution:
Those who do not know God. To know God is to know His holy character, His will, his hatred of sin, and His saving grace toward mankind. Many people have kept themselves completely ignorant and have none of this knowledge of God.
Those who do not obey the gospel. Other people do know something about God and His plan for saving mankind, but they do not act on this knowledge by submitting to the gospel and receiving God's free gift of salvation.
These people will pay the penalty. Eternal destruction is not annihilation, but living in a state of complete ruin.
http://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/Book_of_2nd_Thessalonians/02_2Thess_1_6-12/2Thess_1_6-12_Notes.htm?x=x
Their sin separated them from Him because His holiness requires Him to judge and condemn sin (Isaiah 59:2; Habakkuk 1:13a; Romans 1:18).
That’s because their sin infected all of their offspring and became an inherited human trait (Romans 5:12; 1 Corinthians 15:22a). Every human being who has lived on this earth was born a sinner. We all come into this world under the curse of God’s holy and righteous wrath and with no ability to know, enjoy and glorify Him (Romans 3:10-18).
Sin comes with a penalty that must be paid – and paying that penalty will destroy us. The penalty is the full expression of God’s righteous wrath against our sin (John 3:36b; Romans 1:18; Ephesians 5:6). God’s wrath against sin is expressed by punishing sinners with death, which the Bible defines as eternal separation from God in a place of eternal torment called Hell (Psalm 9:17; Ezekiel 18:4; Matthew 10:28; 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9).
Sinners who place their trust in Him are credited with His perfect Law-keeping and fully forgiven for all their sins (Romans 4:5-8; Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 2:13-14).
http://www.fbcspearfish.org/what-is-the-gospel.html
Trent said...
umm.. huh? that is you stating something, its not an example. show me in the Bible or in the world, how can you pay for something but not have it applied?
Well, I can pay for fertilizer, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to get applied.
Trent said...
He already paid. We did nothing but believed in him.. Yep, Grace.
Payment for sins is part of salvation by grace.
Salvation by grace must be accepted.
Payment for sins must be accepted.
Trent said...
Nope, I said only the people who have not believed in Christ for eternal life. What about the trinity? I am not trying to second guess God, I am trying to understand what he teaches. You and I don't know about the unreached, we only know about the reached. Lets focus on what the Bible teaches and not speculate on something we both can only speculate on.
Is your criteria for going to Hell that you must have rejected Christ?
If it is, what about the people who have not heard of Christ?
If it is not, what is your criteria for going to Hell?
That you do not have life?
If it is, why does one not have life?
Trent said...
Umm.. huh? not 5 pt.
You say payment for sin must be applied like a 5-point Calvinist says atonement must be applied.
Trent said...
I am saying that ultimately as you are separating something that is not separated in scripture.. at least not that you have shown,
Payment for sin and everlasting life are both part of the substitutionary atonement, but the substitutionary atonement is applied only upon saving faith, or else everybody would be saved.
Trent said...
you are saying that ULTIMATELY Christ only died for the elect because you are separating illogically payment and application.. or at least it seems that way right now.
I am NOT saying that ULTIMATELY Christ only died for the elect.
Trent said...
Logically they take place at the same time. If I am missing something, lets keep talking. If you just want to believe it because you are use to it, I understand. If you pay for a car, the payment is applied OR else it was not paid for. Its that simple. IF he paid for the sins of the world, then no one else can pay for them. Again, I am talking about before God. I am not talking about the natural result of sin. Be not deceived, God is not mocked. Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. If you saw sin, you will reap death. But that's not God's punishment for the Sin. That's you sowing what you reap.
If you don’t take advantage of Christ’s payment for your sins, you pay for them yourself.
Trent said...
LB, what did Jesus say you get for believing in him? Eternal life. Where does it say you get application of his blood? You seem to be missing my point as well.
By Pastor J.D. Link
Abundant Grace Fellowship, Blanco, TX
We all must answer this question correctly, for our eternity hangs in the balance. So I ask you today, are you washed in the Blood of the Lamb of God, who the Bible says is Jesus the Messiah (anointed one of God)?
You must put your total faith in the Blood of Jesus, because His blood alone can wash away sins (Rev 1:5).
We saw that His blood is what justifies us (or makes us righteous) before God. It also redeemed us (bought us out of the kingdom of darkness) forever, and by it we have forgiveness of sins (Eph 1:7, Col 1:14, Heb 9:12).
Hebrews 9:22 tells us that without the shedding of blood, there is no remission (forgiveness) of sins.
Let’s look at Leviticus 17:11: For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. (This is also found in Genesis 9:4 & Deuteronomy 12:23).
So the life, or soul, of the flesh (body) is in the blood. That’s why it says in this verse that the blood makes an atonement (a covering, or purging & reconciliation) for the soul, because the blood contains the life, or soul, of the sacrifice. So it is a life for a life; a soul for a soul. The sacrifice is the substitute. It loses it’s life, so you can keep yours. It’s blood is shed, it’s life (soul) is given in the place of the person who actually committed the sin. You see, the penalty for your sin is death (Gen 2:17, Ezk 18:20). So God set up the sacrificial system in order for mankind to continue to exist. In the Old Testament, these sacrifices were only temporary until Jesus could be sacrificed, once for all.
I hope you may understand better, if you didn’t already, how important the blood of Jesus is to us. How His being sacrificed on the altar of the cross, and His life blood being poured out as an atonement for our sins was essential. He is our great substitute. What happened on the cross was the great exchange. A “supernatural swap”, if you will. A Life for a life; a Soul for a soul; the Just for the unjust (1Peter 3:18). Our precious, sinless Jesus became what we were, so that we would become what He is (2 Cor 5:21).
The Word of God says that the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom 6:23). The question is, do you want wages, or do you want the gift? You’ve earned eternity in Hell, but God offers you, free of charge, eternity in Heaven. Don’t think for a moment that Jesus didn’t need to be sacrificed for you. That would be the most foolish and arrogant assumption a person could ever make. The wages of sin is death. Have you ever sinned? Then your just payment is eternal death; you’ve earned it.
http://abundantgracefellowship-blanco.com/Washed_In_The_Blood_2Parts.html
LB said "Well, I can pay for fertilizer, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to get applied."
good try LOL. but you are confusing what is paid for (the fertilizer) and what it is being used for, (the grass) In the case of Jesus's case, the Payment is the application as well. :)
LB said "Payment for sins is part of salvation by grace. Salvation by grace must be accepted. Payment for sins must be accepted. "
Please define How we accept payment for sins and show me where in the Bible it says we accept that payment?
Trent said...
So based on that logic, I suppose you don't consider yourself a sinner?
You say that the payment for the sins of everybody was applied to everybody at the cross. That leaves us with the questions of are there any sinners any more and indeed were there ever really any sinners at all?
LB says "Is your criteria for going to Hell that you must have rejected Christ?"
No, it is Jn 3:16-18. If you have not believed in him for eternal life 1 tim 1:16, Jn 10:30-31. Revelation 20:15.
LB says again "Payment for sin and everlasting life are both part of the substitutionary atonement, but the substitutionary atonement is applied only upon saving faith, or else everybody would be saved."
Thats not what Jn 3:16-18 say, or 20:30-31 or any other condition where Jesus says what you need to have eternal life. thats an assumption and according to scripture, not a correct one. Where is substitutionary atonement mentioned? I was looking for it.
LB said "I am NOT saying that ULTIMATELY Christ only died for the elect. "
Good, we agree. :) He died for everyone.
LB said "If you don’t take advantage of Christ’s payment for your sins, you pay for them yourself."
Where does it say that you have to pay for your sins? Again, I am not saying there are not penalties, I am saying that just like in this life, in eternity, there are consequences. With out the new life we are given that John explains that has no sin, we don't have an option. It really seems like either you are not understanding my stance, or you just can't accept it. Thats ok. but we do seem to be going in circles. Should we move to a different one or do you want to hammer this for a bit more? I know you like some of my posts. :)
Grace and Truth
Trent
by the way, do you realize that Atonement is not even mentioned in the NT in the new american standard or NKJ? In the old KJ it is mentioned once. interesting..
Rom 6:23. Lets look at that. The wages of sin is death. See, its what you get for your work. you get what you sowed just like other scriptures I have quoted. But the gift of God is..?? Having those sins washed away? No? Its eternal life.
LB said "You say that the payment for the sins of everybody was applied to everybody at the cross. That leaves us with the questions of are there any sinners any more and indeed were there ever really any sinners at all? "
LB, if I pay for a ticket, does anyone claim the ticket never existed? Jesus paid for all sin, past, present and future, including mine and yours. why do we confess them as a believer if they don't exist? Why are you arguing something you don't believe? You admit as believers we sin (our old nature at least) and you agree that Christ paid for them. Why are you not holding the same standard to unbelievers? If Christ paid for their sins, they can still sin and Rom 6:23 still applies. Our old nature will die too. Why? Jesus died for all those sins you agree.. but the wages of sin is death. we escape because of the new creation, the new man John tells us about. AMEN
Trent said...
up till here, I think he makes perfect sense!
Trent said...
Not sure what verse he is referencing here, but nothing in the context of Jn 3!
Trent said...
Agreed, BUT they don't go to the LOF for their sins, but because they did not have life and were not good enough to qualify so they get what they sowed.
If our sins are not forgiven, we will spend eternity suffering the consequences of our sins (Matthew 25:46; John 3:36).
Forgiveness of your sins is available if you will place your faith in Jesus Christ as your Savior. Ephesians 1:7 says, "In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace." Jesus paid our debt for us, so we could be forgiven. All you have to do is ask God to forgive you through Jesus, believing that Jesus died to pay for your forgiveness – and He will forgive you! John 3:16-17 contains this wonderful message, "For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him."
http://www.gotquestions.org/got-forgiveness.html
Trent said...
The only escape from the holy wrath of God on Judgment Day (i.e., The Day of Wrath) is the precious blood of Jesus Christ.
actually, the only escape as written is if you have Eternal life. We are inputting theology again here.
You’re saying the precious blood of Jesus Christ is not the only escape from the holy wrath of God on Judgment Day (i.e., The Day of Wrath)?
Trent said...
technically you are saying he did not die for us until we are believers. thats not what this says,
He did die for us, but we’re not saved until we become believers.
Trent said...
stay of execution? fiery vengeance?
You say we all deserve Hell. So, any time we have is a stay of execution.
Trent said...
then Christ did not pay for their sins IF that is in regards to their sin.
Christ did pay for their sins, but the payment wasn’t applied to them.
Trent said...
But they are dying in their sins as I said before. God's wrath is for his rejecting his Son yes.
Here you say God’s wrath is for rejecting His Son. But what about the people who have never heard of Christ?
LB said "If our sins are not forgiven, we will spend eternity suffering the consequences of our sins (Matthew 25:46; John 3:36)."
Yes, I agree with this. I thought I made that clear earlier, that your points were valid in that regard. My argument is that it is not punishment, it is natural consequences. Just like in the Garden of Eden.
LB says "Forgiveness of your sins is available if you will place your faith in Jesus Christ as your Savior. Ephesians 1:7 says, "In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace."
lots of topics here, but again, forgiveness is a fellowship issue. read 1 JN.
LB said "Jesus paid our debt for us, so we could be forgiven. All you have to do is ask God to forgive you through Jesus, believing that Jesus died to pay for your forgiveness – and He will forgive you!"
Now you are leaving scripture agian. where does it say to ask God to forgive you in context of eternal life? Jesus gave one condition for Life! Believe.
John 3:16-17 contains this wonderful message, "For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him."
Yep. Noting here about forgivness or sins. Just belief and Life!
LB said "You’re saying the precious blood of Jesus Christ is not the only escape from the holy wrath of God on Judgment Day (i.e., The Day of Wrath)?" No.
LB said "He did die for us, but we’re not saved until we become believers."
AGREED
LB Said again "Christ did pay for their sins, but the payment wasn’t applied to them."
Trent said again"please show me in scripture where payment and application are separated" quoting someone else who says it is not enough.
LB says "Here you say God’s wrath is for rejecting His Son. But what about the people who have never heard of Christ? " IF they do not believe in Jesus then they will be in the Lake of Fire. BUT how do you know what they know? God is just and we trust in that. What we are focusing on here is what we know, not using hypothetical situations to try and argue what scripture means because of them. :)
Oh, and I think we both agree that the experience in the Lake of Fire will vary scripture is clear on that as well.
Post a Comment