Results 21 - 40 of 83
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: JibbyJee Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Boasting in Man Is Doubly Excluded | Is 2:11 | JibbyJee | 88601 | ||
Dear Joe: That's a great article. Piper's a magnificent teacher. I have a question for you, although it may be a loaded one considering our shared perspective. Do you think the person who ultimately rests upon his own choice of God, rather than God's choice of him, as the determinate factor in salvation, is guilty of boasting in man? I mean, when a person says "God cannot save me unless my free will chooses Him", isn't that dangerously close to toeing the blasphemy line-in-the-sand? In Christ, Jibbs |
||||||
22 | Boasting in Man Is Doubly Excluded | Is 2:11 | JibbyJee | 88623 | ||
Dear Tim: LoL!! I know I may be a bit dense at times, but c'mon brother, you only need to say it once!!! Gimme a break! No, I'm being silly. It's happened to me before, too. I've heard the "gift" analogy many, many times. But in that construct, please answer this objection honestly: You wrote:"Those who believe that Christ died for all and draws all, do not believe that our choice of God is the determinate factor in salvation. The determinate factor is God's timeless decision to die on the cross for the sins of the world." Please be patient with me. I don't understand this at all. To me it's almost a non-statement. How does Jesus dying on the cross for the "WORLD" become the determining factor in the salvation of INDIVIDUALS?? If Jesus' substitutionary payment for our sins on the cross is the determining factor for our salvation as you say it is (I agree so far), not only for us, but also for every other individual on earth, then why aren't ALL PEOPLE SAVED? (Hint; Only the elect will be saved. Matt. 24:31) The whole gift thing (accept/reject) is not found in the Bible. It is a gift ONLY to the elect (Eph. 1:4-14). We were all at one time DEAD in sin. Dead people don't accept spiritual gifts, heck, they can't even understand them (1 Cor. 2:14). But Christ made us alive (Rom. 8:5, 47; Titus 3:5)(that's right, regeneration precedes faith!!) so that we could be saved. Either I'm missing the point of your statement, or you are missing the point of mine, or one of us is not being completely honest with the issue. It's right in line with this: If Jesus paid for the EVERY sin of EVERY man (including unbelief!) then on what basis is ANYONE judged? What sin could be held against them? In Christ, Jibbs PS...Did you get everything moved? |
||||||
23 | One example of loosing salvation NT | Luke 8:13 | JibbyJee | 88943 | ||
Greetings New Creature! I hope you don't mind if I jump in the conversation mid-way. You've said repeatedly that you don't see any "real Scriptural support" of the OSAS doctrine, but you were able to see it, you would be. Well, I would hope so. I also hope you are sincere in your desire to understand the OSAS perspective and even to embrace it in all it's glorious splendor. The doctrine itself is derived from the Glory of Christ. You wrote:"" I agree, God is the author of our salvation. He authored and initiated salvation not us. But what has that got to do with the topic of whether or not salvation can be forfeited or not? Is there not any more solid support from the Bible than what you have provided so far? Give me something solid."" You agree that God AUTHORED our salvation. Good for you! Many "Christians" would even debate that, surprisingly! But let's take a look at the verse itself to see what else it says: Heb 12:2 looking unto Jesus the author AND PERFECTOR of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising shame, and hath sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. ,,,,AND PERFECTOR. Hmm... Would does that mean?? In Christ, JIBBS |
||||||
24 | One example of loosing salvation NT | Luke 8:13 | JibbyJee | 88946 | ||
Dear Andrew: It breaks my heart to hear of another brother in Christ going through trials and uncertainty about God, who is the very essence of Reality. My friend, I plead with you to trust GOD and GOD alone, and not the puffed up "wisdom" of men like that God-hating website. I urge you to read and meditate on Jesus' parable about the wheat and the tares and how there will be be unbelievers who hypocritically masquerade as the real deal. These same parasites that infest the Visible Church invent heresies in an attempt to subvert GOD and His elect. So, yes, there will be division in the Visible Church, but not amongst TRUE Christians. If you could elaborate on the nature of what it is that you are doubting, we will be in prayer for you and perhaps God will lead someone to give you a comforting answer. Also, there are many "intellectuals" both in and out of the Church. For someone to say they are leaving the church because they are "too intellectual" is not only the height of arrogance, but ironically, is also the epitome of stupidity. 1Co 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not in wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made void. 1Co 1:18 For the word of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved it is the power of God. 1Co 1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, And the discernment of the discerning will I bring to nought. 1Co 1:20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 1Co 1:21 For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom knew not God, it was God's good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save them that believe. Pro 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; But the foolish despise wisdom and instruction. I hope and pray that you will find peace and comfort in the LORD GOD. Sincerely, JIBBS |
||||||
25 | One example of loosing salvation NT | Luke 8:13 | JibbyJee | 89023 | ||
Dear NC: My friend, thanks for the reply. Here's something I've recently posted, and I hope to hear your take on it. It's concerning the Apostle Paul's belief that he (while still very much in the flesh) KNEW he was going to heaven. His KNOWLEDGE of this was even ALLOWED by God to be placed in SCRIPTURE and EXPLICITLY at that!! Please explain this: 2 Timothy 4:17 But the Lord stood with me and strengthened me, so that through me the proclamation might be fully accomplished, and that all the Gentiles might hear; and I was rescued out of the lion's mouth. 2 Timothy 4:18 The Lord will rescue me from every evil deed, and will bring me safely to His heavenly kingdom; to Him be the glory forever and ever. Amen. How do you explain this? Let me tell you, what God have revealed to me about Himself and the Grace he has bestowed upon me GUARANTEES that I will be saved and I know it more than I know anything else. Consider this as well and then tell me there is no "Biblcal proof" of eternal security based on these two passages and I will not say another word to you. 2 Corinthians 5:4 For indeed while we are in this tent, we groan, being burdened, because we do not want to be unclothed but to be clothed, so that what is mortal will be swallowed up by life. 2 Corinthians 5:5 Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge. Some versions read "deposit" instead of "pledge", but I'm sure you get the point. The Spirit GUARANTEES salvation-which is the PURPOSE of God! Praise Him! In Christ, JibbyJee |
||||||
26 | One example of loosing salvation NT | Luke 8:13 | JibbyJee | 89081 | ||
Hello NC! Well, I think you missed the point. How much CLEARER or EXPLICIT can Paul's KNOWLEDGE of the CERTAINTY of his salvation get than 2 Tim 4:18??? Let me suggest to you that you that no verse is an island unto itself. Proper hermaneutics are designed to allow God's word to say what it says and not what we want it to say. One of the rules is to always interpret the implicit (like John 15!!) with the explicit (2 Tim 4:18). Yet you refuse to consider that there ARE other viable interpretations to John 15 in light of ALL of Scripture. The Scripture is literally JAMPACKED with verses that support Perseverance of the Saints. So at best you are not being honest with the text, believing an apparent contradiction without any offer of resolution, resting solely on the interpretation of one verse and it's tradition of man. I hate contradictions. Contradictions are the antitheses of truth. If you really believe the Bible is true then reconcile the explicit teachings of 2 Tim 4:18 with John 15:6, for starters. Eagerly awaiting your response.... In Christ, Jibbs |
||||||
27 | One example of loosing salvation NT | Luke 8:13 | JibbyJee | 89149 | ||
Greetings NC! How else would we know we are saved if there weren't teachers like John or Paul to include warnings to the church? Are such warnings the prescription for salvation? No. The warnings describe the actions of those who are TRULY born again by the spirit of God, and being born-again and God's workmanship (Eph. 2:10) they will not fail to obey. What you advocate is "Keep up with the Checklist--and be saved", effectively putting the cart before the horse. If we are saved, THEN the checklist will follow. Works follow salvation. The only ones who will obey are those who have been justified and are being sanctified. I find your usage of Hebrews 6:4-6 to be most curious. Have you ever fallen away? In Christ, Jibbs |
||||||
28 | God--the "loving Father" of whom? | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87184 | ||
I agree with you. There is no way for our finite minds to know who the elect of God are. I guess this is one of those questions that clearly draws the dividing line in the sand between Arminians and Calvinists. It is not as much an issue of the nature of election or predestination as much as it is an issue of Biblical sequence and chronology. I believe some things have to happen before others can occur. For example, you proposed the hypethetical that asked whether or not we are born saved and then lose that status by our own actions. I don't believe anyone is born saved because that would mean that people are in Christ at birth without being spiritually born-again. To be saved one must be born again (John 3:3), which is a gift of God (Eph. 2:8-9) that does not come from the will or desire of man but purely by the will of God (Romans 9:16). To be born saved would mean you would have to be redeemed at birth (Gal. 3:13), given to the Son by the Father (John 6:37) never to be lost by Him (John 6:39-40; John 10:28-29; 1 John 5:13) thus being guaranteed of eternal life. From this, you can see that if anyone is born saved, then we should all be universalists because no one can be saved and end up in Hell. However, I think we are all born deserving of eternal punishment (Ps. 58:3; Gen. 6:5; Rom. 3:10-11). Therefore, as you and I both believe, for God to save children is not a matter of Him being just and giving them what they deserve, but rather that He has mercy upon them despite their sinful condition. Being saved for an adult is no different. We aren't saved simply because we choose to be saved. We choose to be saved because he has mercy on us and delivers us from the bondage of sin upon our entire being. That's how I see it anyway. Looking forward to hearing back from you! Alive in Jesus, JibbyJee |
||||||
29 | God--the "loving Father" of whom? | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87201 | ||
justme Thanks for responding! You're quick! LoL The paedobaptism issue is one that I am not very familiar with. I am not from the Lutheran/Presbyterian tradition so I can't say I have much experience with the reasons for infant baptism other than it's considered a covenant with God. It's easy for me to associate the practice with the Roman Catholic Church, thereby getting goosebumps and stomach cramps, but that isn't really fair. I can think of several godly men that I look up to a lot (RC Sproul for example) who practice infant baptisms because of theological reasons (Covenant Theology). But like I said, I'm mostly ignorant of the issue and will likely remain a "immersion" Baptism guy. As far as the age of accountability, I don't worry about that too much because I think it's something between God and individuals, like you said. So it's not something that can be dogmatically designated (like Mormons do). I believe God justifies and in so doing has mercy and compassion on whom He wills (Rom. 9:18). I trust that God always does what is right. See you later! Alive in Jesus, JibbyJee |
||||||
30 | God--the "loving Father" of whom? | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87206 | ||
Justme I just read your profile and wanted to let you know that I'll be praying for your healing from the cancer. How's it all going? My mother-in-law has been battling thyroid/lymph node cancer for 5 years. She is such a trooper. She's a godly woman who God is using to encourage and witness to so many people. I can't even begin to tell you the impact her response to the ordeal has had on me. So keep your chin up and your eyes on the Glory of Christ (as I'm sure you are!) I'd love to hear about the details if you ever feel the need to chat with a twenty-something kid! :) Alive in Christ, JibbyJee |
||||||
31 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87551 | ||
Hello Hank! There is not real evidence in Scripture to suggest that Jesus died to save everyone. [See John 6:35-45;65, 1 John 2:19; John 17:9; John 8:41-45] The WHOEVER in John 3:16 is literally "all the believing ones". It's describing the truth not giving a prescription. The eisegetical interpretation would be to read into the text the assumption that the atonement makes salvation a possibility for everyone on earth, even the dead, to be saved. By implying the word WHOEVER means an open invitation is to render the Blood of Christ powerless and ineffective to save anyone, because it's potency is contingent upon the exercise of "free will". I can read the exact same verse and let it say what it says and nothing more--All who believe in Jesus will be saved. There is nothing there that suggests he did/didn't die for all men. But in light of all of Scripture, particularly John 6:35-45, it becomes clear that He died TO SAVE and not to FAIL TO SAVE by losing some. In Christ, JibbyJee |
||||||
32 | Belief alone saves? | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87553 | ||
hello IHN, I've been reading the discussion you are having with RJ and was wondering how you define "faith". What is faith to you?? The Bible is clear that we are saved by GRACE through FAITH. This saving faith is a gift given from God (Eph 2:8-9) to us. Since faith is a gift of God that is exercised in men only by the power of the Holy Spirit, there inevitably will be "works" that manifest from this work of God within a believer. We call these "fruits of the Spirit" (Gal. 5:22-23). By these works others will recognize us (Matt. 7:15-21) and without the fruits of the Spirit, there is no true faith (James 2:19-26) because it is not God who is working there, but the evil one (Phil. 1:6; Eph 2:10; Rom. 9:16). I don't think RJ is inconsistent in saying that we are saved by faith AND must do works. However, the works are a RESULT of the the power of the Holy Spirit which works in us by FAITH. Our works don't make our faith, our faith makes our works. IN Christ, JibbyJee |
||||||
33 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87607 | ||
Greetings Hank! I'm sorry to hear that you reject the Gospel that is the basis for the faith which I call my own. Calling Reformed theology a "semantic path" where one should "proceed with caution" is not only a straw-man argument, but is also a moot point considering the exact same accusation could be leveled against Arminians. Second, I'm not sure how being in a reformed church for 35 years has anything to do with our discussion. Obviously you are trying to give your opinions weight by playing the "experience card". Surely you know that you the length of time you are in a church has nothing to do with whether or not their teachings are true. I could be in a LDS church for 5 minutes or 75 years and their doctrine is still just as heretical either way. So 35 years in a reformed church doesn't give you any special knowledge in and of itself. Nor do I have any interest in teaching you anything, even if you had a spirit that was interested in discussing these things. I believe these issues are far from pointless. I believe the very HEART of the GOSPEL lies at the center. Dodge the issue if you feel you must, but as for me, I will defend the GOSPEL even when I'm "sick" of discussing these issues which are under attack. All for the glory of God.. Soli Deo Gloria! In Christ, JibbyJee ps.....I've never been to a reformed church in my life!! |
||||||
34 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87634 | ||
Greetings again, Hank! Perhaps you've misunderstood me or maybe my tone was a bit too straightforward. I'll take the blame for not being clear enough. I don't doubt for one second that you are a follower of Jesus Christ. Your post seems to imply that you thought I made that accusation and I want to clear the record. I responded to your post because I felt you were attacking the very Gospel that I base my faith upon. The Gospel which some call "reformed", but nevertheless, I just call it the Gospel of Jesus Christ and nothing more or nothing less. This same Gospel that I believe in is what you quite blatantly describe as an error. So yes, I do take issue with that. Please note that I in no way said that you reject Jesus Christ, but that you reject the Gospel as I understand it. It was not meant to undermine you at all, so please accept my apology for the miscommunication. I haven't made any assumptions about you, Hank, that you didn't clearly provide for me. For example, you are obviously one who is not Reformed. You specifically take issue with the Reformed faith. I felt your first post to me was both assuming and condescending in tone. All I did was point out a simple logical fallacy in your assumptions and you accuse me of putting a "Calvinistic/Reformed spin on it". I'm sorry, but you've never had any dialogue with me before yet you poo-pooed my opinion like yesterday's trash. How is that kind or respectful? Isn't it possible that the "Calvinistic/Reformed" interpretation is the correct one?? Now, I value the opinions of everyone I meet whether they see eye-to-eye with me on the issues or not. I will dialogue with you and discuss the Scriptures all night if you want, and I bet we would have a good time doing it. I just ask that you treat me with sincerity and respect and not with flippant rhetoric. Once again, I apologize for the disharmony. I truly desire to have honest and loving dialogue on these issues, even when we disagree. Please understand that I do not, have not, and will not EVER make a remark to you or anyone else on this forum concerning their standing with Jesus Christ UNLESS they are obviously promoting heresy. I hope that clears things up. Sincerely in Christ, JibbyJee |
||||||
35 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87684 | ||
Tim Thanks, it's good to be here. I've enjoyed this forum immensely so far. Regarding the majority of the proof-texts that you gave in support of an indefinite/universal atonement: I'm not sure how any of these verses support your view. Could you please explain them to me as you understand them? Regarding the WILL TO SAVE ALL verses you listed: again, I don't see how you can come to those conclusions in light of their own context, let alone the entirety of Scripture. Surely you've debated this issue many times here so if you choose not to I totally understand. I will leave you with this though. John 6:35-45 is what I believe to be the clearest, most explicit teaching about the particular extent of the atonement. Couple that with the intercessory prayer of Jesus in John 17 and the Book of Hebrews and you have a very formidible task in disproving that the precious, cleansing blood of Christ was ineffective on anyone. Ultimately, that is what universal atonement advocates are forced to believe. Sincerely in Christ, JibbyJee |
||||||
36 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87753 | ||
Greetings Tim! Where you moving to/from? It's a great time to take advantage of interest rates and upgrade to a bigger home or refinance your mortgage, that's for sure. Lots of people selling their homes these days. My wife and I are considering doing just that as well. Anyway, Joseph3 gave some very solid arguments to each one of the verses you listed, something I didn't have time to do myself. But I completely agree with him. His posts are almost verbatim what I would have written. So now you know where I stand. You asked the question "does Christ draw all men or not?". You also listed John 12:32 and John 6:44. From John 6:44 we see a key distinction that is omitted from John 12:32. "AND I WILL RAISE HIM UP ON THE LAST DAY". So the question "does Christ draw all men or not?" by nature begs the question "Are all men raised at the last day?" You could say that all men will be raised up for judgment on the Last Day, and I would agree with you. But I deny that it fits this passage of Scripture. Directly in the context of John 6 in verse 40 Jesus clearly ties being "raised up" with being given eternal life. So that rules out unbelievers from being "raised up" as spoken of here. It's clearly speaking of salvation and to that I'm certain you would agree. So I think both questions are answered. Jesus draws all men to Himself in the sense that He is both Judge and Savior. No man escapes His Sovereign authority. Futhermore, if we continue to the logical conclusion of tying John 6:44 to John 12:32, then in order to remain consistent, we are forced to say that all men will be raised up to eternal life on the Last Day (John 6:40). In short, we are forced to be Universalists. IF John 12:32 and John 6:44 mean the same thing, then everyone will be saved and no one will go to Hell. I hope that explains why I don't believe the two verses are speaking of the same thing. John 6 is speaking directly of the powerful Sovereignty and Grace of God in Salvation. To me, it's the greatest passage of Scripture in the Bible (if there could be such a thing!)... Sincerely in Christ, JibbyJee |
||||||
37 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87799 | ||
Hello again Tim! Congrats on your ordination in the Church of the Nazarene. The Church of the Nazarene was my first denomination after being saved in 1997. My pastor was Dr. Les Parrott in Puyallup Washington. He's been all over the U.S. so I'm sure you'll hear about his legacy in the denomination if you haven't already. (I think he also was the first President of Olivet University but I'm not certain on that.) Anyway, he was a great pastor and his son Les Jr. and his wife have a very successful worldwide family ministry that is based here in the Northwest. Regarding your post: To start, Tim, I need to say something in love to you. I think as Christians are obligated to be certain that we are not sacrificing truth for the sake of "simplicity". I understand your desire to read what the text "simply" says, but that doesn't always guarantee that we understand the full implications of our interpretation. Sometimes the Bible is not expressly clear and requires such implicity to be explained by more explicit verses. I do believe it is dangerous to make the verses more complex than need be, but at the same time, it is equally dangerous to define truth by how "simple" it is to understand. With that said, I hope we can come to some agreements that resolve what may seem like contradictions in the Word. ((The subject is 'no one'. The main clause is 'No one can come to me'. The next clause explains how anyone can come, only if God draws. The last clause says, 'and I will raise him up at the last day.' Who is the 'he'? The one who comes.)) Respectfully, I don't understand how you can divorce the latter half of verse 44 from the first half. Jesus is clearly saying the no one CAN come (inability) without being drawn. That clearly establishes the "drawing" as the force behind the coming. Jesus identifies his role in relation to verse 40 in the words "and I will raise him up on the last day." He directly links the drawing to the coming so that the two are inseparable. Think about it for a second. What does verse 44 say about the one who doesn't come? Are they drawn? I believe the goal of the "drawing" is salvation--the Father giving to the Son. Are you saying He draws all but that drawing fails to save some?? Isn't this basically saying the God makes salvation possible but doesn't actually save anyone? In Christ, JibbyJee |
||||||
38 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87909 | ||
Hi Tim! It must be about 4pm your time right now and I am on my lunch hour. I would be complaining that you're almost off work right now until I found out your 9-5 is on the opposite end of the clock. Ouch!! The night shift can be a mean one! According to your interpretation of John 6, the grace of God draws all men. If we are saved by grace, then I assume you also believe grace must also fail to save, unless you believe everyone will be saved. If I understand the implications of your interpretation, you are saying God applies the same grace to the Apostle Paul and Hitler alike. Under your view, God doesn't do anything for those who come to believe on Him that He doesn't also do for the perishing. Therefore, God in and of Himself, plays NO active role in the salvation of anyone specifically( compare Isa. 63:5). The will of man is the ultimate deciding factor in salvation (compare Rom. 9:16; John 1:13). Your understanding is that God desires all people everywhere to be saved but that His will is impotent when dealing with "autonomous" free will decisions of men. I don't want to misrepresent you here. It's hard to be super-accurate given the time and space constraints. If this is not an accurate portrait of your beliefs, please clarify so I can better understand your position and clearly discuss them with you. As for the simplicity of "all" issue, tell me what you think of this: Matt. 4:8--Is there really a mountain where ALL the literal world can be seen? Is this even possible? John 1:29--Does Jesus literally take the sin of the ALL the world upon Himself? I think you would agree that the reason Jesus took sin upon Himself was to bear the punishment for it in our place. If He took a sin to the cross, then He took the wrath of God for it. His atoning work is completed. With that said, how, then, does God justly punish anyone? If all sins have been paid for, then what is the basis for eternal punishment? In Christ, JibbyJee |
||||||
39 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 87982 | ||
Hi John! Greetings in Christ! Thanks for the kind words. I hope all discussions here are done in a manner pleasing to the Lord. Prayerfully, the Lord will give us all gentleness and respect. I know you know what I'm talking about. 1 Peter 3:15; Gal. 5:22-23. Alive in Christ, Jibbs |
||||||
40 | THE CROSS | John 3:16 | JibbyJee | 88006 | ||
Tim, happy weekend greetings! Thanks for taking the time out of your busy schedule to chat with me. I do appreciate it! I'm going to try to answer your post one paragraph at a time. Not sure if I'll finish, though. 1. This goes back to the Christian belief that God saves (Isaiah 63:5). The supposition that God intends to save all yet manages to lose some cannot be defined by any other word but failure. The very definition of failure is the inability to accomplish that which you set out to do. So the question really is: Did Jesus intend to save every man on Earth or not? 2. While I think you have given what you sincerely believe to be the definitive answer to my question, please allow me to give reasons why I disagree with your conclusions. Bear with me while I explain: It's my belief that all men everywhere are sinners and therefore under condemnation whether they hear the Gospel or not (John 3:18,36; Rom. 3:10-11; Eph. 2:3). Because of this natural corruption of man (1 Cor. 2:14), we cannot save ourselves (or even desire to) nor is God under any obligation to redeem any of us. This means none of us can demand salvation from Him. Furthermore, if God only decided to save 5 people on Earth and let the rest go on to Hell (where apart from grace, their desires will take them) He is still perfectly just. Do you see my point? If God only made atonement for those He intended to save, there is nothing unjust at all about that. So the question is not "How can God not try and save so-and-so?" but rather "Why does God save ANYONE?". So again, my friend, I ask you to seriously consider the scope of the atonement in relation the the nature of God's wrath. If Jesus paid for all the sins of every man, on what basis is anyone judged??? I know it may sound trivial, but the answer is the key, in my opinion, to better understanding Jesus' redeeming purpose on Earth. 3. In this paragraph you've given an either/or proposition which I think can be reduced to a simpler argument: Either God saves without the assistance of man or God needs man's cooperation in order to save them. My first question here is "do you or do you not believe God COULD save all?" I certainly believe He could if He chose to, but the Bible reveals not only that He doesn't do so, but also the reasons why (Romans 9:21-24). The central aspect I've gathered from this paragraph is the value you've assigned to human choice. I absolutely agree with you that we must choose to be saved, but where we disagree is on how that choice comes to fruition. The Bible says no one seeks God (as natural men)(Rom. 3:10-11) and that we are dead in trespasses and sins (Eph 2:1). Were you saved by something you did or by something God did? Here's something that humbled me a great deal (after many sleepless nights!!) when I was first compelled to consider these things: Imagine for a moment yourself standing next to an unbeliever before the throne of God. What differentiates the two of you? How did you gain the attire in which your dressed? Were you smarter than the person next to you? Were you more spiritually inclined? What was in you that caused you to believe that wasn't in the wretched sinner at your side? Please allow me to humbly let you know how difficult these things are to consider honestly. I experienced it for myself. But I believe the truth put things into perspective for me. I (we) are rotten sinners who don't deserve Christ any more than the next guy. Our belief doesn't make us righteous. Christ and Christ alone made us righteous when He bore all our inequities on the Cross. Our coming to Him in belief is the proof of that victory over the ghastly grips of sin upon us. You've said that under my understanding, everyone COULD not be saved. Actually, I believe everyone WILL not be saved. There's a significant difference. Not that everyone COULDN'T be, but rather that God has chosen not to according to His own will and purpose (Eph 1:4). But I don't limit God. I don't know who He will save. So I concentrate on my own walk with Jesus so that I cause no one to stumble, and this for the sake of the elect. 4. First, we could debate the usage of verses like 1 Tim. 2:4 or 2 Pet. 3:9 as they are used in their own context to show that the verses are talking about all Christ died for (the believing ones). Here are some verses that speak of a particular redemption that you asked for. Please read them: Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; Eze. 34:10-11; John 10:11; John 10:15 Now as far as a verse that specifically uses the exact phrase you demand, you're right is saying it doesn't exist. But that doesn't mean the doctrine is not implied by the whole text of Scripture. For example, the word "Trinity" is not found in the Bible. Do you believe in the Trinity? Why? Coram Deo, Jibbs |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Next > Last [5] >> |