Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | Reformer Joe | 5712 | ||
The problem here is that you are taking it as axiomatic that unregenerate man in any way has the ability to "choose God," that he is morally free to do so. Please show us in Scripture where it declares that man's will is free in this regard. Therefore, you seem to be interpreting Scripture in any way possible to protect this idea that man is free to choose, which I hold to be refuted soundly by Romans 3:10-18 and John 6 and Romans 9. Christ died not to OFFER payment of sins to all men, but to become sin for us (2 Corinthians 5:21), to die in our place (Galatians 2:20). Nowhere in the Bible do we see that he is a "hypothetical redeemer" or a "propitiation in theory." Your entire re-hashing of Norman Geisler does nothing but say that Jesus' death on the cross was incomplete in some fashion. Either Christ atoned for MY sin on the cross, undergoing the just wrath of God for MY sin, or he did not. It is not up to me to decide 2,000 years later whose sin Christ paid for. That is so undermining to the very biblical notion of God's freedom and sovereignty, and only exists to support the very unbiblical notion of man's unlimited moral freedom and sovereignty concerning salvation. Try to look at these Scriptures without the assumption that humans are morally capable of choosing to follow Christ (whether unaided or merely "wooed" by the Holy Spirit), and see if the freedom of man's will can be exegeted from the Bible. It is God who chooses, the Son who dies for those who are chosen, and the Holy Spirit who regenerates the chosen and causes them to believe in the Son who died in their place. The unsaved are completely left out of the salvation scenario. The unsaved are not chosen by God, and therefore they will justly suffer for all eternity for their own sins, since Christ did not pay for them on the cross. Any other scenario breaks down when carried to its logical conclusion. We end up with either universalism, an impotent God, or the penalty for sin being paid for by Christ AND the unbeliever. --Joe! |
||||||
2 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | Makarios | 5858 | ||
Joe, there are numerous exhortations in Scripture to turn to God (Isaiah 31:6, Joel 2:13, Acts 3:19 for example) to repent (Matthew 3:2, Luke 13:3,5, Acts 2:38, 17:30), and to believe (John 6:29, Acts 16:31, 1 John 3:23). So why would God waste his time with us living our lives if man's will wasn't free in this regard? Scripture indicates that 'election' is based on God's foreknowledge of who would respond positively to such exhortations (Romans 8:28-30, 1 Peter 1:1).I am not interpreting Scripture in every way possible just to back up my point. I could accuse you of the same thing. And Romans 3:10-18, John 6 and Romans 9 do not refute the idea of man's free will. Please show me in these verses where it 'soundly' says so.I really don't understand what you mean by "propitiation in theory", but in Scripture, Christ died for and has appeared to all men, not merely the elect (Titus 2:11, 1 Timothy 2:6, 4:10, Hebrews 2:9, 1 John 2:2).As for Norman Giesler, I don't even know the guy! And it is not for us to determine who Christ died for, since it is clear that Christ died for all, the righteous and the unrighteous, so that we would have the opportunity to choose Him. Try to look at Scripture and see where it says that God cares for and loves all men (John 3:16) and sent His Son to die for all, being the perfect Sacrifice, once for all. If I have knowledge but not love, have I gained anything? God does not create people to hate them. This simple fact will refute your theories of predestination and show how flawed and incomplete they really are. | ||||||