Donations for the month of September


We have received a total of $50 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Featured Member
Registered: Sunday, September 7, 2014
Posts: 2
Forum Stats
786 Members
30 Forums
5874 Topics
47208 Posts

Max Online: 41 @ Saturday, June 30, 2012 7:54 AM
Top Posters
Pilgrim 13345
J_Edwards 4843
Tom 3901
Wes 3553
chestnutmare 2474
CovenantInBlood 2375
MarieP 2311
RJ_ 2288
John_C 1903
gotribe 1767
Top Posters (30 Days)
Pilgrim 29
Tom 19
rstrats 9
Robin 6
chestnutmare 5
John_C 4
Tom Mor 2
calvin 2
jerrybarry24 1
Recent Posts
Matthew 12:40
by Pilgrim
Wednesday, September 17, 2014 10:04 AM
Belief a Choice?
by Pilgrim
Wednesday, September 17, 2014 7:40 AM
Scripture Inherency
by Tom
Sunday, September 14, 2014 5:22 PM
The death of Jesus
by Pilgrim
Saturday, September 13, 2014 11:12 AM
Agree or Disagree?
by Tom
Thursday, September 4, 2014 11:53 PM
Merit and Moses: A Critique of the Klinean Doctrine of Republication
by Pilgrim
Thursday, September 4, 2014 11:14 AM
Page 3 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
Hop to:
#19767 - Tuesday, December 21, 2004 1:13 PM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."?
MarieP Offline
Permanent Resident

Registered: Friday, March 28, 2003
Posts: 2311
Loc: Kentucky
Ron,

Very well said, and, no, I don't think Pilgrim is being picky either.
_________________________
True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin

Top
#19768 - Tuesday, December 21, 2004 1:15 PM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."? [Re: Pilgrim]
MarieP Offline
Permanent Resident

Registered: Friday, March 28, 2003
Posts: 2311
Loc: Kentucky
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased! grin
_________________________
True godliness is a sincere feeling which loves God as Father as much as it fears and reverences Him as Lord, embraces His righteousness, and dreads offending Him worse than death~ Calvin

Top
#19769 - Tuesday, December 21, 2004 5:57 PM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."? [Re: Pilgrim]
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life

Registered: Sunday, December 9, 2001
Posts: 4843
Loc: USA
Quote:
Pilgrim said,

I thought I had made it clear that I do believe that there are "general benefits" which the reprobate and unregenerate share by virtue of the direct benefits given to the elect. I have no problem if one desires to call these residual benefits part of God's common grace. But my objection has always been in the "language" used in this thread, i.e., "Christ died for all in a general way"; insisting that such language most always connotes "in behalf of" (aka: substitution). So to iterate my objection: Yes, there are general/common benefits which flow to all mankind from Christ's death of a physical/material nature. But Christ's death was specifically designed and accomplished for the elect and them only. There may be crumbs which fall from the master's table. But they are not to be understood as being synonymous with the actual food that was served to someone else.

You can call me "picky" if you wish. But I think it is essential that we protect the biblical terminology used in regard to Christ's atonement, which was purposed and accomplished for all those whom the Father gave Him.

Though I understand your concerns and it is wise to protect the words and phrases it is also important to restore them back if they been abused, etc. It is also unwise to assert only incomplete truths. IMO this is what you, RonD, and others are mistakenly doing.

First, you are asserting only the positive side of the Cross. By denying Jesus died for all in a “general way,” you embrace that He died only for the elect. As you know I also agree that Jesus died effectually only for the already elect—this is not under contention. However, when Calvary took place Jesus also sealed the fate for the already condemned (John 3:18). There is no other way of salvation (John 14:6). In addition, Jesus is LORD over ALL and this lordship was sealed by way of the Cross (Phil 2:5-11). This is one way Jesus died for “all” in a general way.

Second, you assert the misuse of the word for. Indeed, some do misuse it to their own shame, however the way you assert it is not necessarily the way I, the author of the original quote in question, meant it—which you have already acknowledged.

Joined to this though you made the assertion that: But my objection has always been in the "language" used in this thread,.. and But I think it is essential that we protect the biblical terminology used in regard to Christ's atonement, and then you assert, There may be crumbs which fall from the master's table… RonD asserts, Sure, God knew that crumbs would fall from the table but this is a bi-product of the atonement and not some teleological end.

What is profound here is on the one hand you assert that you are “protecting the biblical terminology” and you then distort the actual scripture itself? May we call this crumby exegesis rolleyes2 This Gentile woman exhibited saving faith. Saving grace is being exhibited here not mere common grace (please note the references to LORD and Master in the text; Matt 15:27, Mark 7:26, etc.). This is not some mere “bi-product of the atonement!” What is happening here is the woman reveals a tenacious faith even as a Gentile (v. 28). Jesus explicitly commends this faith. While Jesus may have granted common grace to a “Christian” in the healing of her daughter, the crumbs refer to the saving faith of this Gentile woman… May all of us Gentiles eat of these crumbs which are not the mere “common grace” that you asserted! Read the Baker N.T. Commentary for a complete exegesis.

Lastly, “common grace” may not be looked at as distinct from the Cross. This is yet another way Christ died for the non-elect. Murray made this exceptionally clear saying in Redemption Accomplished and Applied,

Quote:
The unbelieving and reprobate in this world enjoy numerous benefits that flow from the fact that Christ died and rose again. The mediatorial dominion of Christ is universal. Christ is head over all things and is given all authority in heaven and earth. It is within the mediatorial dominion that all the blessings which men enjoy are dispensed. But this dominion Christ exercises on the basis and as the reward of his finished work of redemption... (Phil 2:8-9). Consequentially, since all benefits and blessings are within the realm of Christ's dominion and since this dominion rests upon his finished work of atonement, the benefits innumerable which are enjoyed by all men indiscriminately are related to the death of Christ and may be said to accrue from it in one way or another. If they flow thus flow from the death they were intended thus to flow. It is proper, therefore, to say that the enjoyment of certain benefits, even by the non-elect and reprobate, falls within the design of the death of Christ.

In denying Christ died for all men in a “general way” you do away with the actual fact of the source of “common grace.” If common grace is not sourced at Calvary pray tell where is its source, etc.?

All of you have a Merry Christmas—we are off to see relatives and thus will be unavailable to defend this post further, but hopefully the light will turn on for someone… hello
_________________________
Reformed and Always Reforming,

Top
#19770 - Tuesday, December 21, 2004 9:25 PM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."? [Re: MarieP]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
SemperReformanda said:
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased! grin


Amen and amen.

BTW, our church switched to the ESV and it says "pleased". I prefer "on whom his favor rests". "Pleased" seems to connote a quid pro quo, whereas "favor" seems more in line with unconditional election. Thoughts?

Christmas Blessings!

Ron

Top
#19771 - Friday, December 24, 2004 2:56 AM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."?
Anonymous
Unregistered


One aspect of the Cross is that it abated for a time God's judgement upon sin ( I cannot remember who said that, but it does make some sense).

For this reason-- the reprobate do enjoy a 'charisma', a 'gift' from what Christ accomplished on the Cross.

Christ died for God and God was satisfied with Christ's sacrifice.

The general call to repent and believe is made to all, yet only those who are Gods elect will respond. And if I expound on that theme, it will take us off track..

However scripture does show where God bestows grace ( using 'grace' loosely, in the sense of a 'gift'):

that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. (MAtt 5:45 NKJV)

So scripturally, we can see God bestowing common gifts enjoyed by both the regenrate and the unregenrate.. by the vessels of his glory, and the intstruments of his wrath, and bestowing it upon them collectively.

The original question though was; IS the work of the cross, a common gift for all to enjoy? The answer is no.

Only those who have been saved, who have been called, who have been redeemed will recieve any anjoyment from the work of Christ ( mans Chief end is to glorify God and ENJOY Him forever).. the work of the cross is foolishness to them that perish..

Pilgrim outside of the Holy City, sees the sign above the Celestial City gate "All ye who would enter in"-- as he crosses over the threshold, he looks back at the gate and the sign above it now reads: "many are called, but few are chosen"

( I may have misquoted Bunyon.. its late-- almost 3:00 am here, so If I did: MEA CULPA)

I probably didn't add anything to this thread-- perhaps I just felt a need to 'pontificate'. who knows.

Top
#19772 - Saturday, December 25, 2004 10:28 PM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."?
Anonymous
Unregistered


Might I belabor the point one more time to possibly show where the regenerate and reprobate enjoy common grace from what Christ accomplished on the cross...? I realize that this might be a reversal from my previous post-- but upon further reflection, I need to make this retraction.

Zech 3:9
'For behold, the stone that I have set before Joshua; on one stone are seven eyes. Behold, I will engrave an inscription on it,' declares the LORD of hosts, 'and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day'

Isa 9:7
There will be no end to the increase of {His} government or of peace, On the throne of David and over his kingdom, To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness From then on and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this.

It appears that Christ coming and accomplishing what he did for us had some effects ( i.e. the lands sin-- is this the physical earth, or the region-- had its sin removed in one day.---- Of the increase of his Government.. even the reprobate are citizens of his Kingdom, and of his government. SO the benefits that fall to us from that moment on the cross, seem to be spilling over to them as well. )

Also -- just an idea.. and I could be off base, but again I am still reflecting on this-- it just occurred to me.

As Covenant theology believers--we believe the promise extends to us and our immiediate family members. IN fact, if our spouse is not a believer, they and our children are considered 'Holy' before the Lord.. Is not this also a form of 'common grace' which they share?

I also realize that even though they be viewed as Holy before the Lord, we still believe they need to come to a saving knowledge of the truth, or else sadly they too will perish, but while they are alive, they enjoy a benefit of what Christ did on the cross-- that work was for the elect-- but it seems to me that scripturally I have found enough scriptural references to 'begin' to say that: "the un-regenerated man enojoys some common benefit, and some common grace because of what Christ did for his Elect".

For someone who has been un-formally trained-- its just my 2 copper pennies worth is all.


Edited by Aslans Singer (Saturday, December 25, 2004 10:36 PM)

Top
#19773 - Friday, December 31, 2004 10:03 AM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."?
Anonymous
Unregistered


To all,

It is amazing how reason and logic can run so afoul of scripture.
Common Grace has nothing in the least to do with the Cross of Christ's work on the Cross. The moment creation came into existance, common grace came into effect. It is what upholds this universe. We live and move and have our being from God. If He would at any moment remove Grace, we would die, strivel and return to the void, not just dust, but the void of precreation.

Regarding the "all" that for some of you means "all" for some it means a particular 'all".
Scripturally, in speaking about salvation one must align it with what we are being saved from.
Christ's work was to overcome the fall of Adam.
The Scriptures, is quite clear, that this is in fact, what He accomplished. If all men received the judgement of Adam, Death, then Christ must restore that fallen condition. If Adam was universal in its effect, then Christ's work must also be universal in its effect.
The universe itself suffered the effects of Death, so therefore the uinverse is also redeemed.
That is precisely what Scripture affirms clearly with the following:
II Cor 5:14-19; Col 1:15-20; Eph 1:10, John 5:28-29; Rom 5:14-19; I Cor 15:20-22; John 12:32.

Christ's work on the Cross is a universal redemption. Someone stated that it cannot be universal because we know that not all are saved. This is a result of an incorrect supposition being put on scripture to prove something else. The salvation of man, individually, is clearly not universal. The universal redemption of Christ provided the means whereby man could again enter into a union with God. A union that Adam had before the fall. Again, the two must align or you will be buried in confusion. All of mankind was saved from DEATH. The texts above clearly point this out. Adam died, Christ gives LIFE. So much so, that all men will recieve immortality, eternal life. This is born out in Acts 24:15; as well as Acts 23:6, though not as clear. Also Rev 20:11-15.

Top
#19774 - Friday, December 31, 2004 10:12 AM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."?
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho

Registered: Tuesday, April 3, 2001
Posts: 13345
Loc: NH, USA
Quote:
sojourner said:
All of mankind was saved from DEATH. The texts above clearly point this out. Adam died, Christ gives LIFE. So much so, that all men will recieve immortality, eternal life. This is born out in Acts 24:15; as well as Acts 23:6, though not as clear. Also Rev 20:11-15.

I surely don't want to misunderstand what you are intending to say in this quote, so let me ask you directly: Are you positing that ALL (i.e., every man, woman and child that has, does and every will walk the face of this earth) are going to be saved? i.e., you deny the biblical doctrine of eternal punishment and hold to universal redemption?

In His Grace,
_________________________


simul iustus et peccator


Top
#19775 - Friday, December 31, 2004 10:39 AM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."? [Re: Pilgrim]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Pilgrim,

Quote:
I surely don't want to misunderstand what you are intending to say in this quote, so let me ask you directly: Are you positing that ALL (i.e., every man, woman and child that has, does and every will walk the face of this earth) are going to be saved? i.e., you deny the biblical doctrine of eternal punishment and hold to universal redemption?


I thought that I quite clearly stated the difference as is done in scripture. The answer to your first question is, NO.
However, Christ's redemption is universal. The salvation of individual man is not. There is a vast difference. Unless of course, you believe that some men did not fall under the judgement of Adam.
That also, since you mentioned the doctrine of eternal punishment, would not be possible if only some are redeemed. Your understanding is that some are redeemed, thus only some are saved.
If that be true, then hell does not even exist. That was the whole purpose of Christ coming in the first place. To correct the fall and save His own creation from annhilation.

Top
#19776 - Friday, December 31, 2004 11:46 AM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."?
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life

Registered: Sunday, December 9, 2001
Posts: 4843
Loc: USA
Quote:
However, Christ's redemption is universal.

Scripture speaks of Christ “actually” accomplishing redemption for His “church,” for the “sheep”, etc. and not “goats” etc. It is limited in design, not power. If Christ accomplished the redemption of ALL mankind (without exception), none could ever be lost, as ALL sin (including that of “unbelief”) would already be forgiven….

Please read these articles on Limited Atonement for a more in-depth view of Scripture on the topic, as the view you are asserting has been condemned by the Church for centuries....

Respectfully, I am sure Pilgrim and others will reply to the rest of the errors in your post.
_________________________
Reformed and Always Reforming,

Top
#19777 - Friday, December 31, 2004 1:20 PM Re: "Christ died in a general way for all."? [Re: J_Edwards]
Anonymous
Unregistered


J Edwards,

Quote:
Scripture speaks of Christ “actually” accomplishing redemption for His “church,” for the “sheep”, etc. and not “goats” etc. It is limited in design, not power. If Christ accomplished the redemption of ALL mankind (without exception), none could ever be lost, as ALL sin (including that of “unbelief”) would already be forgiven….


You assert without any texts. What specific texts would refute the texts that I showed in an earlier post? Actually redemption was for the world, for the universe, the physical world as well, which mankind is a part of.

You believe none could be lost because you hold to a view that is not scriptural, that redemption of mankind is the same as the salvation of man. You would need show as well, based on the texts given already, that some men never died, never fell under the judgement of Adam in order to make them stand.

Also, Christ did not accomplish forgiveness of mankind. He provided atonement for mankind. Atonement is not, does not mean forgiveness. He removed the penalty of sins, so that those in Christ can be forgiven, thus not be condemned. He brought Life, overcame the fall.

Quote:
Please read these articles on Limited Atonement for a more in-depth view of Scripture on the topic, as the view you are asserting has been condemned by the Church for centuries....
Limited atonement is a calvinistic innovation. It is not the least scriptural. As far as history is concernced, you should get your facts straight. Universal redemption has never been condemned by the Church. What was condemned is Universal salvation of man. There is a vast difference.
Actually, what was not accepted as well is limited atonement amoung other things much later by Patriarch Jeremiah in the late 16th century.

Top
#19778 - Friday, December 31, 2004 1:59 PM Limited or Unlimited Atonement???
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life

Registered: Sunday, December 9, 2001
Posts: 4843
Loc: USA
Quote:
You assert without any texts. What specific texts would refute the texts that I showed in an earlier post?

The articles I gave you are full of Scripture. Scripture repeatedly qualifies those for whom Christ laid down His life in such a way as to point to a very definite limitation. Those for whom He suffered and died are variously called 'His sheep,' John 10:11, 15, 'His Church,' Acts 20:28; Eph. 5:25-27, 'His people,' Matt. 1:21, and 'the elect,' Rom. 8:32-35.

Quote:
Limited atonement is a calvinistic innovation. It is not the least scriptural.

Please offer some Scriptural support for your assertion??? Please “exegete” ONE Scripture (any ONE) that supports unlimited atonement???

Quote:
As far as history is concernced, you should get your facts straight. Universal redemption has never been condemned by the Church. What was condemned is Universal salvation of man. There is a vast difference.
Actually, what was not accepted as well is limited atonement amoung other things much later by Patriarch Jeremiah in the late 16th century.

I guess it needs to be determined what I meant by the phase “the” Church. (NOTE: I did not say “a” church like the RCC, or like that of the Arminians, but “the” Church, referring to one that believes in correct doctrine—i.e. not those apostate in doctrine.).

Hmmm…. did Patriarch Jeremiah live before Augustine? Of course, we could go back to the Apostle Paul who to my knowledge (1) taught Church doctrine (2) taught limited atonement (Rom 9).

Please give us (a) a dictionary or systematic theology reference, and (b) a definition to what you mean by (1) Universal redemption, and (2) Universal salvation??? TMU many use these terms as follows: Universal Redemption, meaning a bringing of Adam and his race back again to the probationary state in which Adam was when he sinned and Universal Salvation (perhaps first expounded by Origen) holds that all entities are subject to eventual salvation. Both are unbiblical.
_________________________
Reformed and Always Reforming,

Top
#19779 - Friday, December 31, 2004 3:39 PM Re: Limited or Unlimited Atonement??? [Re: J_Edwards]
Anonymous
Unregistered


J Edwards,

Quote:
The articles I gave you are full of the Scriptures. Scripture repeatedly qualifies those for whom Christ laid down His life in such a way as to point to a very definite limitation. Those for whom He suffered and died are variously called 'His sheep,' John 10:11, 15, 'His Church,' Acts 20:28; Eph. 5:25-27, 'His people,' Matt. 1:21, and 'the elect,' Rom. 8:32-35."


These are all referencing the purpose of the redemptive work of Christ. Again, one must go back to the beginning. The Creation and fall and result. Adam was created good, he was neither mortal nor immortal. He lived a life in communion with God. He was created in God's image in the Likeness of Him. Man in this Image is free, communal, and distinctive. God created man a free moral agent. One who could love and obey Him freely, without compulsion, force, or any other restriction. We also know that from the beginning we were predestined to be conformed to His Image. That is what Adam was in the process of doing when he sinned.
He sinned thus plunging man and the universe into death and corruption. The judgement against Adam was death. Death thus reigns for all mankind. We inherit this judgement. Adam also died instantly. Because he now exhibited the results of death, thus sin, the communion he had with God was also lost. There was nothing inherently wrong with His walk with God. It was that it was no longer possible. Man was now on a trek of annihilation. Physical death, is the separation of body and soul. Man was not created to be mortal but immortal. If man is dead, and no longer able to commune with God, his created purpose, upon his physical death, would be eternally separated from God. We know this as well from the fact that God evicted Adam from the Garden so that he did not have access to the Tree of Life which, if he partook of it now, would guarantee that annihilation. Eternally in a death state and void God's creation.

Christ was the answer as He had promised Adam right from the beginning. Christ would overcome the judgement of Adam for all of mankind. For the universe. It is all part of God's creation which fell under the judgement of Adam.

Christ overcame death so that mankind could be freed from the bondage of death and sin. The death of Adam was reversed, Christ brought Life to the universe. That was the primary work of Christ. This was done in order that God might once again have communion with man. The world was reconciled to God by Christ's victory on the Cross. He put the universe in a right relationship, He (God) justified the universe through through Christ's work.

So far we have spoken of redemption. Now man is able to again walk with God. God redeems mankind so that He is able to call ALL men to himself. Every man must answer to God's call. There is no passivity here. One must either accept Christ or reject Him. There is no gray area. When we accept Him by faith we enter into His Kingdom through baptism which is repentance and the forgiveness of sins. This forgiveness was made possible only because of Christ's atonement on the cross. A secondary gift for those who would accept Him. Sin was not eradicated, man's sinful nature was not done away with, we still live in a sinful environment, and thus to stay in communion, we must seek forgiveness of our sins. Sin still separates us from God as it did Adam. We chose whether we will love and obey willingly or reject Him freely. As long as we remain IN Christ there is no condemnation IN Christ. Those that believe not have already been condemned.
The rest of the NT is about remaining faithful, running the course, enduring to the end.
If we fail, we will fall under condemnation as well. The atonement removed the penalty of those sins, but only if we seek forgiveness.

No place in scripture will you find any limitation on the redemptive work of Christ. Never does it say that He came to save some of the lost. He came to save the lost. Does that mean only some or all? If some, then some are not lost. He also came to save sinners to repentance. For you there would of necessity be some who are not sinners.

He redeemed mankind so that all men could be called to repentance. It never says that some will be called to repentance. He also states that He desires that all be saved. For this reason He redeemed all men, otherwise God is lying to us for He really only came to save some and really only desires that some be saved.

God does not really love mankind. God is not really love. He loves only some and is willing to let the rest of His creation to become annihilated, including the physical universe. You then will have a problem with His second coming and the establishment of a New Heaven and New Earth. This one has already been redeemed, just needs purification.

I might also add this question? Do you believe in the Incarnation of Christ?

Quote:
but “the” Church, referring to one that believes in correct doctrine
by scriptural definition, the Church is Christ. So I would assume that He believes in correct doctrine. However, that Church is ontological, is an organic entity and has a concrete reality to it. In other words, man is not a spiritual being and exists in this world. The Church cannot be apostate ever. Man, as members of Christ's body can become apostate, as history has very aptly shown.

Quote:
Hmmm…. did Patriarch Jeremiah live before Augustine? Of course, we could go back to the Apostle Paul who to my knowledge (1) taught Church doctrine (2) taught limited atonement (Rom 9).
Not unless Augustine lived in the 16th century. Yes, Paul not only taught it, but gave it as an instrument of Christ via the Holy Spirit. However, limited atonement was never one of them but you can try to show that he did.
Roman 9 has absolutely nothing but universal redemption. So much so, that not only Jews but the Gospel is also going to be for the Gentiles. It does not say some Gentiles.

Vs 30-33 the way of salvation is faith, has always been faith in the OT and the NT. To everyone who believes. Chapter 10:4 reemphasizes this again. You will find no limited redemption or atonement in scripture.

Top
#19780 - Friday, December 31, 2004 4:57 PM Re: Limited or Unlimited Atonement???
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life

Registered: Sunday, December 9, 2001
Posts: 4843
Loc: USA
Quote:
Adam was created good, he was neither mortal nor immortal.

What was he then? Did the 2nd man Adam become like the 1st man Adam—neither mortal or immortal?

Quote:
Man was not created to be mortal but immortal.

But, you said above that ADAM was neither?

Quote:
Christ was the answer as He had promised Adam right from the beginning. Christ would overcome the judgement of Adam for all of mankind… The death of Adam was reversed, Christ brought Life to the universe…. The world was reconciled to God by Christ's victory on the Cross. He put the universe in a right relationship, He (God) justified the universe through through Christ's work.

You have yet to “exegete” a SINGLE Scripture to prove this assertion. Just because you say it does not make it true??? Please show me from the Scripture and its proper interpretation???

Quote:
As long as we remain IN Christ there is no condemnation IN Christ. Those that believe not have already been condemned. The rest of the NT is about remaining faithful, running the course, enduring to the end. If we fail, we will fall under condemnation as well. The atonement removed the penalty of those sins, but only if we seek forgiveness.

So, you do NOT believe in the Perseverance of the Saints???

Quote:
He redeemed mankind so that all men could be called to repentance.

If they are already redeemed, then why do they need to repent?

Quote:
God does not really love mankind. God is not really love.

So, now you out rightly deny the Scripture again: 1 John 4:8 The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love.

So many errors, so little time. Someone else I am sure will jump in and identify so many others. What kind of Church do you attend (name, denomination, website) or do you not attend Church at all?

Top
#19781 - Friday, December 31, 2004 8:04 PM Re: Limited or Unlimited Atonement??? [Re: J_Edwards]
Anonymous
Unregistered


J Edwards,

Quote:
What was he then? Did the 2nd man Adam become like the 1st man Adam—neither mortal or immortal?
No, not like he was created, but like he fell. Christ is the only one who is able to give Life again. Man could never redeem himself. In order to do so, he would need to live a perfect sinless life. That is the whole issue of why Christ did it for us. That all we need to do is accept this Work by faith. Christ did it all for us.

Quote:
But, you said above that ADAM was neither?
Precisely. that was the work that man was to fulfill and accomplish as King and Priest of God's creation. That man would share in the Divine, be conformed to God, for us it has become conformed to Christ, who is the perfect Image of the Father. Man would have attained immortality as his reward. Since the first Adam failied, Christ accomplished this for mankind with His redemption through the Incarnation.

Quote:
You have yet to “exegete” a SINGLE Scripture to prove this assertion. Just because you say it does not make it true??? Please show me from the Scripture and its proper interpretation???
I have already given you 10 texts that attest to the universal redemption by Christ. But...
Let's repeat to clarify: II Cor 5:14-19. vs 14 IF One died for all, then all died. To not be universal, there must be some who have not died. vs 15 He died for all so that we could live IN Him. Christ died for all, gave life to all, in order that we (believers) could live IN Him. In Him is our salvation.
Then dropping down to vs 19 Christ was reconciling the world to Himself. Not imputing their tresspasses or sins against them. Universal atonement. Then vs 20 shows that man must be reconciled to God. Man does this by accepting His Redemptive work by faith, repents, is baptised which is partly, the forgiveness of sins.

Also, I Cor 15:20-22: These texts really need no exegesis. Quite plainly this says In Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. Universal redemption and immortality. Adam was the father of mortality and earthly life, Christ is the father of immortality and spiritual life.

Again, Romans 5:14-19 is saying the very same thing again. Here is it even more emphatic and shows the correlation of Christ's work which resulted in the justification of life. The free gift came to all men. Never does it ever even imply that it is partial, or selective, or limited or anything but universal.
To show that the universe itself was redeemed, Eph 1:10. Col 1: 15-20
All men will be called or drawn: John 12:32.
In addition: John 5:28-29, Acts 23:6 and Acts 24:15 clearly state that ALL shall be raised. Believers and unbelievers. ALL DEAD SHALL BE RAISED. You would of necessity need to show that either not all will be raised, or that only some died therefore all dead will be raised.

Quote:
So, you do NOT believe in the Perseverance of the Saints???
Very probable not the same way you do. Under your view, Adam could not have ever sinned.

Quote:
If they are already redeemed, then why do they need to repent?
They were redeemed for the purpose of Union with Christ. To enter into Union with Christ, repentance is a mandated requirement. Or, redemption is not the salvation of individual man.

Quote:
So, now you out rightly deny the Scripture again: 1 John 4:8 The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love.
I can see why you have trouble understanding. That was a satirical remark based on your view of redemption. God loved mankind. Why would He not. He created us for a very specific purpose. That purpose was lost in the fall. Redemption was necessary, so that mankind could once again be in Union with Christ. Freely in Uniion with Christ as was Adam.

Quote:
What kind of Church do you attend (name, denomination, website) or do you not attend Church at all?
The only one that counts. It is Christ's established Church here on earth, the one He instituted. The Church of One Faith, One Baptism, One Lord, The Apostolic Church embodied in the Orthodox Church today.

Top
Page 3 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >



Who's Online
0 registered (), 22 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
DAVERK, Predestined, dowryh15, Ian Groom, Jocelyne Louise
786 Registered Users
Shout Box

September
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
(Views)Popular Topics
Is man required to "choose" in order to be saved? 432159
...The people miscalled Antinomians ? 346027
Westminster Larger Catechism 314276
The importance of going to church 250881
Roman Catholicism and salvation 240858
Double predestination 223695
"Christ died in a general way for all."? 211207
Gospel truth 181910
Creation 166167
Continuity in Old and NT 131498