Donations for the month of December


We have received a total of $20 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Tom
Tom
Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 3,316
Joined: April 2001
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,544
Posts50,745
Members921
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,307
Tom 3,316
chestnutmare 2,864
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,748
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,057
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 24
Pilgrim 19
Recent Posts
Sexual harrassment fraud
by goldenoldie. Mon Dec 11, 2017 3:25 PM
Christian Leaders Behaving Badly
by Anthony C.. Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:41 PM
Israel
by Pilgrim. Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:21 AM
Classical vs.Presuppositional Apologetics
by Pilgrim. Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:45 AM
Trying to understand the Confessions
by Tom. Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:29 PM
Question I read
by Tom. Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:04 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 6 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
#39595 - Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:26 AM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: CovenantInBlood]  
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
xyz Offline
xyz  Offline


Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
EU based
Quote
CovenantInBlood said:
Quote
xyz said:
Quote
CovenantInBlood said:
Quote
xyz said:

It is acceptable if one is without sin. But, because the Christ is the Christ because he alone is without sin, rejection is unacceptable, even folly. One may, like the 'blind' Pharisees, say that one does not sin, and that living a decent, law-abiding life is enough; or one may openly accept that one is a sinner, and even accept that Jesus' propitiation is effective, but refuse to give up the riches and 'pleasures' of this passing world. Either way, to reject Christ's sacrifice is to commit the unforgivable sin, unrepentance, and put oneself under law and therefore condemnation.


(Scriptural support for unrepentance being the unforgiveable sin?)

So Christ's propitiation is not effective for the unrepentant. This being the case, was it Christ's intention to die on behalf of the unrepentant?

Christ died for all sins, past, present, future, so that no-one can claim impunity against God.

Quote
And if so, did Christ fail in His mission?

Christ died for all sins, past, present, future, so that no-one can claim impunity against God.


You've reiterated yourself, but you haven't answered my questions.

Was it Christ's intention to die on behalf of the unrepentant, yes or no? If yes: Did Christ fail in His mission since His propitiation is not effective for the unrepentant, yes or no?

Who decides what is effective? Christ died for all sins, past, present, future, so that no-one can claim impunity against God.

#39596 - Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:17 AM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: xyz]  
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 983
Robin Offline
The Boy Wonder
Robin  Offline
The Boy Wonder

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 983
Florida
Then you are a universalist according to what you have asserted here. But if salvation is the work of God upon the elect, then Christ died only for them, and His eath was not effectual for the rest.

You can't have it both ways. Either salvation is an accomplished fact, effective for those it was intended for, or the blood of our Savior was mostly wasted, since the great majority of humankind is lost.

#39597 - Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:49 AM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: Robin]  
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
xyz Offline
xyz  Offline


Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
EU based
Quote
Robin said:the blood of our Savior was mostly wasted, since the great majority of humankind is lost.

Who would be God if sin went unaccounted for?

#39598 - Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:17 PM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: xyz]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,316
Tom Offline
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,316
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
I am sorry, but I haven't the foggiest what your answer is alluding to. If this is the way you talk to your students, how do they learn anything?

To other posters who are reading this, am I the only one that is getting frustrated with the way xyz answers others?

Tom

#39599 - Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:41 PM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: Tom]  
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
xyz Offline
xyz  Offline


Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
EU based
Quote
Tom said:
I am sorry, but I haven't the foggiest what your answer is alluding to. If this is the way you talk to your students, how do they learn anything?

They are used to theological language. To put the question in simpler terms: Who would be God if people could sin and get away with it?

#39600 - Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:54 PM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: Tom]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 418
Paul_S Offline
Old Hand
Paul_S  Offline
Old Hand

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 418
The Bronx, NY
Quote
Tom asked:

am sorry, but I haven't the foggiest what your answer is alluding to. If this is the way you talk to your students, how do they learn anything?

To other posters who are reading this, am I the only one that is getting frustrated with the way xyz answers others?


The answer, my friend, is blowing in the sky with diamonds.

::
::
::
::
::
::
::
::
::

Sorry, Tom, I couldn't resist attempting to try to answer you with as much meaning and logic as our alphabetically-inclined mutual acquaintance. You are absolutely right; without knowing his motivation, it seems clear that he has little interest in "hold[ing] firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it".

His fallback line, not only tossed about irrespective of context, is actually a complete non-sequitur, saying in effect, that since all sins have been paid for, everyone is guilty in God's sight. When one is reduced to that level of illogic it may indicate that further discourse will be unprofitable.


In Christ,
Paul S
#39601 - Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:27 PM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: xyz]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,308
Pilgrim Offline
Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,308
NH, USA
Quote
xyz said:
Quote
Tom said:
I am sorry, but I haven't the foggiest what your answer is alluding to. If this is the way you talk to your students, how do they learn anything?

They are used to theological language. To put the question in simpler terms: Who would be God if people could sin and get away with it?

How strange that some of us here are more than familiar with "theological language" but who, nonetheless, are more than confused by your responses. At best they seem evasive if not outright "illogical", as Paul_S stated.

RE: "To put the question in simpler terms: Who would be God if people could sin and get away with it?" Now truthfully, are you really asking (rhetorically it is assumed), if sin was not dealt with judicially, who would be God? I can't imagine anyone being God if sin was and is dealt with judicially. Are you SURE you are wanting to know, "who would be God"? but perhaps you meant to ask, "who would God be if sin wasn't dealt with judicially?" <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratch1.gif" alt="" />

Regardless of this mess, the fact remains that God HAS indeed dealt with sin; i.e., no one gets away with sin(ning) without receiving just punishment for it. The biblical teaching is that ALL men are punished for both being sinners by nature and thus they are under God's wrath. And they are punished for any and all sins; secret and overt. However, how and when they are punished is the matter at hand:

1. True believers were punished for their sinfulness and actual sins at the cross since the Lord Christ was their substitute AND they are clothed in Christ's imputed righteousness at the moment they believe in Christ.

2. Unbelievers will be punished at the final Judgment according to their sinful nature and for every transgression of God's holy law.

Thus, if Christ died as a perfect substitute for ALL men without exception, then de facto, ALL men must and will be saved. For in Christ the full wrath of God was poured out upon Him in punishment thus satisfying the full demands of the law. Since Christ atoned for ALL sins for those whom He died for, there is nothing..... NOTHING to warrant further punishment; including unbelief, rejection of some pet doctrine, etc., etc. ad infinitum. The biblical teaching is that ALL those who are given faith and repentance WILL not only come to Christ for justification but they also are given the indwelling Spirit Who works sanctification in them unto final glorification. Christ's atonement made a FULL SATISFACTION, for salvation is by grace alone (Sola Gratia), in Christ alone (Solus Christus) through faith alone (Sola Fide)! <====== Note: theological terms. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#39602 - Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:44 PM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: Pilgrim]  
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
xyz Offline
xyz  Offline


Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
EU based
Quote
Pilgrim said:
Since Christ atoned for ALL sins for those whom He died for, there is nothing..... NOTHING to warrant further punishment

There is if Christ's atonement is not accepted. To reject substitutionary propitiation is to put oneself under law, and all under law are condemned, except Christ.

#39603 - Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:41 PM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: xyz]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,308
Pilgrim Offline
Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,308
NH, USA
Quote
xyz said:
Quote
Pilgrim said:
Since Christ atoned for ALL sins for those whom He died for, there is nothing..... NOTHING to warrant further punishment

There is if Christ's atonement is not accepted. To reject substitutionary propitiation is to put oneself under law, and all under law are condemned, except Christ.

1. IF there is an exception, as you seem to suggest, then Christ did NOT atone for ALL sins, which leaves the sinner with something that must be atoned for by some other means. The result is, of course, that salvation is impossible since even the slightest infraction of the law incurs eternal punishment.

2. As has been explained on several occasions here, Christ's atonement was SUBSTITUTIONARY and totally SUFFICIENT for those for whom He died. Put simply in non-theological terms, salvation from beginning to end was SECURED in full and infallibly so for those whom Christ died. ALL that is necessary for salvation; regeneration, justification, sanctification and glorification, is included in His vicarious, substitutionary atonement. When it is applied, the recipient infallibly repents and believes upon Christ and is preserved by grace to the end.

Christ put it quite simply when He said,


John 6:37-39 (ASV) "All that which the Father giveth me shall come unto me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I am come down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the will of him that sent me, that of all that which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day."


So, what part of this unassailable biblical truth do you not understand?


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#39604 - Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:32 AM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: xyz]  
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
CovenantInBlood Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
CovenantInBlood  Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian


Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Virginia
Quote
Quote
Was it Christ's intention to die on behalf of the unrepentant, yes or no? If yes: Did Christ fail in His mission since His propitiation is not effective for the unrepentant, yes or no?


Who decides what is effective? Christ died for all sins, past, present, future, so that no-one can claim impunity against God.


To propiate is to appease an offended party, to turn away wrath. If Christ's propitiation (turning away the wrath of God) was on behalf of the unrepentant, His propitiation is ineffective if the unrepentant still remain subject to God's wrath. That is, Christ's turning away of God's wrath toward the unrepentant does not actually turn away God's wrath toward the unrepentant. If Christ died for all sins, past, present, and future, then his death is ineffective if anyone is still subject to God's wrath. There must then be some other principle that is effective in salvation other than Christ's death, whether man's choice or something else. It's not a matter of who decides what is or is not effective; it's a matter of logic and scriptural teaching. So, please answer my questions:

Quote
Was it Christ's intention to die on behalf of the unrepentant, yes or no? If yes: Did Christ fail in His mission since His propitiation is not effective for the unrepentant, yes or no?


Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
#39605 - Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:43 AM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: xyz]  
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
CovenantInBlood Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
CovenantInBlood  Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian


Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Virginia
Quote
xyz said:
Quote
Pilgrim said:
Since Christ atoned for ALL sins for those whom He died for, there is nothing..... NOTHING to warrant further punishment

There is if Christ's atonement is not accepted. To reject substitutionary propitiation is to put oneself under law, and all under law are condemned, except Christ.


You have previously stated that "Christ died for all sins, past, present, future." You have also stated that "to reject Christ's sacrifice is to commit the unforgivable sin, unrepentance." There is a pretty basic logical contradiction between these two statements.


Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
#39606 - Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:05 AM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: Pilgrim]  
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
xyz Offline
xyz  Offline


Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
EU based
Quote
Pilgrim said:
Quote
xyz said:
Quote
Pilgrim said:
Since Christ atoned for ALL sins for those whom He died for, there is nothing..... NOTHING to warrant further punishment

There is if Christ's atonement is not accepted. To reject substitutionary propitiation is to put oneself under law, and all under law are condemned, except Christ.

1. IF there is an exception, as you seem to suggest

Where do I seem to suggest an exception?

#39607 - Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:29 AM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: xyz]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,308
Pilgrim Offline
Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,308
NH, USA
Quote
xyz said:
Where do I seem to suggest an exception?

Seriously, are you really that incapable of handling basic communication skills? never mind lacking in common logic? I have to believe that you sit there at your computer laughing away at us for trying to deal with your silly and nonsensical responses. [Linked Image]

However, I shall press on and answer your question with your very own reply given above:

Quote
There is if Christ's atonement is not accepted. To reject substitutionary propitiation is to put oneself under law, and all under law are condemned, except Christ.

Well? There you have your exception in your very own words...... do you recall typing that statement yesterday? [Linked Image] "If Christ's atonement is not accepted.", you say; whatever that means. [Linked Image]

Therefore, you obviously hold that Christ died for ALL sins; past, present and future . . . EXCEPT for the sin of "rejecting substitutionary propitiation". So, how does one atone for that one sin should the person repent and seek forgiveness since Christ's atonement didn't cover that one sin?

Now, sit back and take a deep breath and TRY to think about this before answering. [Linked Image]


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#39608 - Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:57 AM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: Pilgrim]  
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
xyz Offline
xyz  Offline


Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
EU based
"If Christ's atonement is not accepted."

That is not a sin per se. It is ok provided that one has some other means of justification. It is disastrous because there is no other means than Christ's atonement.

#39609 - Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:44 AM Re: For Whom Did Christ Die? [Re: CovenantInBlood]  
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
xyz Offline
xyz  Offline


Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 70
EU based
Quote
CovenantInBlood said:
Quote
Quote
Was it Christ's intention to die on behalf of the unrepentant, yes or no? If yes: Did Christ fail in His mission since His propitiation is not effective for the unrepentant, yes or no?


Who decides what is effective? Christ died for all sins, past, present, future, so that no-one can claim impunity against God.


To propiate is to appease an offended party

And Jesus' sacrifice made sure that no-one can claim to have offended God and got away with it, otherwise God would not be sovereign. That is why Jesus' sacrifice is effective. God is satisfied, and what people do about it is their own business in that respect.

Page 6 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 18 guests, and 111 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
drewk, patrice, Robert1962, Ron, billmcginnis
921 Registered Users
Shout Box
December
S M T W T F S
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
31
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Popular Topics(Views)
663,473 Gospel truth
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.053s Queries: 16 (0.002s) Memory: 2.7286 MB (Peak: 3.0358 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-12-12 02:44:03 UTC