|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/18/2008 9:52:15 PM
|
|
|
sunofone
Posts: 506
Joined: 10/11/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: sunofone
Hi,thanks for your response.I hope to address you in the same spirit you addressed me.In my post concerning world,I showed where the same word can be used to refer to world differently.
I am fully aware that context determines how words may be used. Rom 1:8 offers a good example of how "whole world" cannot mean the entire human race, since the context makes clear that "whole world" is referring to a geographical area, and not even everyone living at that time, such as Eskimos, etc.
The point is that in the verses I posted for you, there is nothing in the context of the verses to understand "world" or "all men" as less than the entire human race.
We find the phrase "all" in Rom 3:9, which says that "all are under sin" and in Rom 3:23, which says that "for all have sinned". Are you going to tell me that the "all" in these 2 verses mean only that "all kinds of men" are being referred to? That would be ridiculous, wouldn't it.
Yet, reformed theology wants to render "all" that way in every verse that speaks of who Christ died/atoned/propitiated for.
Excuse my question as it is admittedly sarcastic.Are you even reading my Post? I mean I went through the detail of explaining what I see in the verses you provided,point by point.I mean I thought I was pretty thorough,meticulous even.Can you at least refer back to that post and tell me where you find disagreement or you can just ignore it,and ignore me.
Either is fine by me,although I would prefer that we continue an honest discussion.
I'm adding this to my post for the benefit of others who might not want to go back and see where I clearly addressed this point several post ago.Here it is here:
Now let me address Paul and what he wrote in Romans 3 vs 22-25,before I get to this allow me to back up just a bit to vs 9,12 of the same chapter.Here Paul argues that That Jews and Gentiles alike are ALL under sin.ALL have turned away they have together become worthless;
Paul is clear without any speculation or misapplication of the word that ALL refers to the entire human race,every individual as he groups both the Jew and the Gentile together.
The next time Paul refers to all,it used in an entirely different context,and again Paul is absolutely clear of it's application:This righteousness from God comes through FAITH in Jesus Christ to ALL WHO BELIEVE,there is no DIFFERENCE,FOR ALL HAVE SINNED.
Notice what Paul is saying and how even in this verse it is used differently.It is first used to apply to only those who believe,the same is confirmed in John's gospel which I provided previously chp 1 vs12 Yet to ALL who received him,to THOSE gave he the right to become children of God. This right is not extended to ALL,no, it is qualified by those who believe only.vs 13 confirms and further illustrates Paul's use of the word ALL in the latter part of the verse.
Paul says there is no difference,meaning no EXCEPTION,for ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.What is Paul saying here? how is he applying the word difference and all here?
It is once again clear what or how Paul intends for us to understand this.Paul is kicking the legs out from under the Jews here.Imagine being taught that you were God's chosen people,that you were literally God's child by virtue of your birth,and then being told this:
What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? What is Paul asking? he's asking them whether they are any better than the gentiles in the eyes of God,he's asking them if their birth right alone entitles them to the privilege of being children of God.
He was asking them to accept that a new day had come upon them,where they were no longer entitled to the right of God's elect by virtue of their birth. (See Hebrews 8 vs 9-13)Don't believe me let's let Paul finish the verse:
Not at All! emphatically NO! We have already made the charge that JEWS AND GENTILES alike are all under sin.So here goes the proper context of the word ALL in the beginning part of verse 25 FOr ALL have and fall short of the glory of God,and are justified freely by what and to whom? Their birthright?The fact that they were the seed of Abraham?
No sir,and mam it was through the redemption that came by drum roll please! CHRIST JESUS.And do pray tell how this righteousness of God comes,THROUGH FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST!
Don't want to take Paul's word for it look at John 1 vs 13 Children born not of natural descent,nor of a husband's will,but born of God.
What about Jesus,what does he have say about all of this?John chp 8 &10:
Jesus when he challenged the Pharisees legitimacy of birthright,said something very interesting.8 vs 35
He said and the servant abideth not in the house forever;but the Son abideth forever.Ishmael born of the bondwoman was cast out,while Issac born of the free woman remained.They were both Abraham's seed,yet as Paul acknowledged and Jesus alluded to, not all Israel is of Israel,Nether because they are the seed of Abraham are they all children,but in Isaac shall thy seed be called.
Jesus was telling them in plain language that they were not children of God.They were not the righteous seed.Rather they were after the nature of the cast out son,the alien.Jesus said if you can't hear me that is, understand me and respond to my voice it is because you are not of God.
Jesus acknowleged them being Abraham's seed but let's see what was at the heart of the matter:If you were Abraham's children,ye would do the work's of Abraham.You do the deeds of your father who is who?Jesus said to the IF God were your Father you would love me.
Now here comes the rhetorical question that God loves to pose to men,especially disobedient and proud men.You know like Adam where are you? What have you done? Here's Jesus question to them,Why do you not understand my speech?Even because ye can not hear my word.
Now let's make it plain Jesus as to whose children they were.You are of your father the devil.Humm! Jesus said He that is of God heareth God's words;ye,therefore,hear them not,because you are not of God. I'm sorry we can't accept that card here.Birth certificates are not equal or accepted as payment for the price of admission,Faith in Jesus is.
Jesus further illustrates this point when gives the parable of the sheep.Jesus said that his sheep know his voice and he knows his sheep.Jesus said he came to seek and to save those who were lost.Jesus said the sheep were scattered after the hireling shepherd left them in the hands of the wolf that scattered them.
Jesus gathered the lost sheep of Israel,than he went after the one that was not of the fold that he must also bring in the pen.This leads me to the second significant thing which happened after Abraham.God choosing Jacob over Esau that election might stand of him that calls,not of works.
That is, it is Gods choosing not ours.Just like the children of Israel in Exodus 11,God chose them to save them.It is no different now God chooses us.
Now can you please deal with this before you accuse me of twisting words again.Thank you
< Message edited by sunofone -- 6/19/2008 8:54:45 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/18/2008 9:53:22 PM
|
|
|
FolkSingerBlues
Posts: 554
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline
|
I restate, there is NO ONE who will escape being accountable to God.
As far as believing goes, my NIV Bible version says:
quote:
As surely as I live,' says the Lord, 'every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.
But I hear that there is some debate as to whether the NIV is correct or not.
Sounds like the issue is taken care of.
_____________________________
My New Blog site
Proof texting is a very dangerous thing...If we were given the Scriptures it was to humble us into realizing God is right and the rest of us are just guessing.
-Rich Mullins
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/18/2008 9:56:11 PM
|
|
|
bob97
Posts: 2019
Joined: 6/24/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
quote:
I restate, there is NO ONE who will escape being accountable to God.
And?
Bob
_____________________________
The LORD clears the road for me!
The LORD is my high ridge, my stronghold, my deliverer!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/18/2008 10:01:19 PM
|
|
|
sunofone
Posts: 506
Joined: 10/11/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
Regardless of what UR states or not, 1 Tim 4:10 says "the living God,who is the Savior of all men, especially of belivers", and 1 John 2:2 says "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, ... and for the sins of the whole world". These verses are clear, and your attempt to twist "all men" and "whole world" into something less that what is specifically stated doesn't limit the fact that Christ did die for everyone.
But neither Ezra nor I think that dying for everyone saves everyone. We know that the basis of our justification is faith in His blood, per Rom 3:23-25.
Now this discussion is beginning to seriously deteriorate.To suggest that I am now twisting scripture.First off I can read and comprehend.I both see and hear the word all and world just as you do.I do not twist it's meaning,I merely make an attempt to understand it's application.It's one thing to disagree with my evaluation of the word,yet another to accuse me of twisting it.
It's OK if we don't come to agreement on this or any other issue.If I or you has done our best to present our view concerning scripture,and have not moved someone to reevaluate their position,or caused them to agree with our position.Than that has to be alright.It is not necessary to suggest that one is twisting words,unless it can shown that,that is what is clearly going on.
Again I went through the tedious process of explaining that world and all does not in all cases mean everyone.You have admitted this to be the case yourself.We may not agree with my interpretation,or it's appropriate usage,and that's fine.Let's stop short of accusing each other of willfully bending or twisting words or scripture though OK.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/18/2008 10:46:47 PM
|
|
|
FolkSingerBlues
Posts: 554
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline
|
And...?
I would say that I can only speak to for myself. I trust that God's judgment will be Good, Just and in Love.
As to WHAT the judgment will be I can only speculate.
_____________________________
My New Blog site
Proof texting is a very dangerous thing...If we were given the Scriptures it was to humble us into realizing God is right and the rest of us are just guessing.
-Rich Mullins
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 9:18:30 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ezra
When it comes to those who are incapable of responding to the Gospel, we must be clear that Christ was the propitiation for the sins of THE WHOLE WORLD.
Aren't people judged worthy of hell for not believing?
how can one be judged worthy of hell for not being able to believe?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 9:35:18 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sunofone
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: sunofone
Hi,thanks for your response.I hope to address you in the same spirit you addressed me.In my post concerning world,I showed where the same word can be used to refer to world differently.
I am fully aware that context determines how words may be used. Rom 1:8 offers a good example of how "whole world" cannot mean the entire human race, since the context makes clear that "whole world" is referring to a geographical area, and not even everyone living at that time, such as Eskimos, etc.
The point is that in the verses I posted for you, there is nothing in the context of the verses to understand "world" or "all men" as less than the entire human race.
We find the phrase "all" in Rom 3:9, which says that "all are under sin" and in Rom 3:23, which says that "for all have sinned". Are you going to tell me that the "all" in these 2 verses mean only that "all kinds of men" are being referred to? That would be ridiculous, wouldn't it.
Yet, reformed theology wants to render "all" that way in every verse that speaks of who Christ died/atoned/propitiated for.
Excuse my question as it is admittedly sarcastic.Are you even reading my Post? I mean I went through the detail of explaining what I see in the verses you provided,point by point.I mean I thought I was pretty thorough,meticulous even.[/quoe]
No offense, but extremely wordy would be a better description. Can I ask you the same question: do you read my posts? I answered your charge about word usage and even gave an example of when "whole world" cannot mean everyone in humanity from Rom 1:8. Did you read that? So, your lengthy dissertation on word usage is refuted on the fact that it is context that determines how a word is meant. So, just because there are a vew passages where "all men" can mean "all kinds of men" doesn't mean that in every passage it means that.
My point, which you can ignore or not, is that in the passages I've given you, there is no contextual reason to view "all" "all men", "world" and "whole world" to be anything less than everyone. You have failed to demonstrate otherwise, from each text. All you've done is make broad claims about how words can be used. You must deal with each text to determine how it is used in that text.
quote:
Now let me address Paul and what he wrote in Romans 3 vs 22-25,before I get to this allow me to back up just a bit to vs 9,12 of the same chapter.Here Paul argues that That Jews and Gentiles alike are ALL under sin.ALL have turned away they have together become worthless;
Paul is clear without any speculation or misapplication of the word that ALL refers to the entire human race,every individual as he groups both the Jew and the Gentile together.
The next time Paul refers to all,it used in an entirely different context,and again Paul is absolutely clear of it's application:This righteousness from God comes through FAITH in Jesus Christ to ALL WHO BELIEVE,there is no DIFFERENCE,FOR ALL HAVE SINNED.
Ok, now I've seen 2 of the reformed wanting to argue that the "all" in v.23 refers all the way back to v.22. Nice try, but the context of what is said in v.23 refers back to 3:9, and "all are under sin". Your attempt to link the "all" in v.23 with the "all" in v.22 is merely an attempt to sidestep the issue that Paul has included the entire human race in how one is justified freely. You can ignore it or even reject it, but Paul included the human race in v.23. It is directly linked to 3:9.
quote:
Don't believe me let's let Paul finish the verse:
Not at All! emphatically NO! We have already made the charge that JEWS AND GENTILES alike are all under sin.So here goes the proper context of the word ALL in the beginning part of verse 25 FOr ALL have and fall short of the glory of God,and are justified freely by what and to whom?
No sir,and mam it was through the redemption that came by drum roll please! CHRIST JESUS.And do pray tell how this righteousness of God comes,THROUGH FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST!
Paul's words contradict your claim. The human race is under sin and has sinned. And from the human race all who believe are justified. That is what Paul has said.
quote:
Now here comes the rhetorical question that God loves to pose to men,especially disobedient and proud men.You know like Adam where are you? What have you done? Here's Jesus question to them,Why do you not understand my speech?Even because ye can not hear my word.
Your theology assumes they cannot hear because God has stopped their ears. Yet, Scripture contradicts your assumption. Note Paul's comment in Rom 10:18, which says "But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course they did". There are many passages from the OT that clearly note that the Jews weren't paying attention, the source of their "not hearing my word".
Paying attention indicates free will, because one can either pay attention to what is said or not pay attention, as the Jews did repeatedly.
quote:
Now can you please deal with this before you accuse me of twisting words again.Thank you
I did. My comments rendered much of your lengthy post irrelevant, so I deleted those parts. Please deal with my comments. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 9:37:45 AM
|
|
|
thorkraki
Posts: 102
Joined: 6/17/2008
Status: offline
|
As a new believer I have been reading these posts on this issue with a lot of interest. Maybe I am too new to make a statement, but I prayed about this, and here is what I think:
At least for me, right now, salvation for babies, those who never heard the Gospel, people who were maybe born without the mental capacity to understand, and so on, is a question that I cannot answer for sure, either by reason or by Scripture.
But reason and Scripture do tell me that God is infinitely just and good, and part of my faith is to have faith the He will do justice by these people.
Thor
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 9:44:19 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sunofone
quote:
Regardless of what UR states or not, 1 Tim 4:10 says "the living God,who is the Savior of all men, especially of belivers", and 1 John 2:2 says "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, ... and for the sins of the whole world". These verses are clear, and your attempt to twist "all men" and "whole world" into something less that what is specifically stated doesn't limit the fact that Christ did die for everyone.
But neither Ezra nor I think that dying for everyone saves everyone. We know that the basis of our justification is faith in His blood, per Rom 3:23-25.
Now this discussion is beginning to seriously deteriorate.To suggest that I am now twisting scripture.First off I can read and comprehend.I both see and hear the word all and world just as you do.I do not twist it's meaning,I merely make an attempt to understand it's application.It's one thing to disagree with my evaluation of the word,yet another to accuse me of twisting it.
When someone attempts to apply a different meaning to a word, that the context does not support, what word would you like me to use, if not "twisting". If you are offended, I apologize. But you are "wringing" out a different meaning than the context supports.
quote:
Again I went through the tedious process
That's putting it mildly. lol
quote:
of explaining that world and all does not in all cases mean everyone.You have admitted this to be the case yourself.We may not agree with my interpretation,or it's appropriate usage,and that's fine.
No, actually it's not "fine". If one misunderstands what the verse says, that one is wrong. The challenge is to understand the verses and what they mean. Of course we may disagree. That only means that either of us is wrong, or both of us are wrong. You have the burden of proof to demonstrate clearly (not tediously  ) why the passages I've provided do not mean what they literally say.
For example, "all men" is an inclusive term, and includes everyone.
otoh, "all kinds of men" is an exclusive term, and excludes some.
So, when the Bible uses "all men" in reference to the work of Christ, the burden of proof is on you to show how it is exclusive, as your theology claims.
quote:
Let's stop short of accusing each other of willfully bending or twisting words or scripture though OK.
I've never accused you of "willfully" doing anything. For all I know, you've done it in ignorance. The point remains: demonstrate why a word is exclusive if you think so. From the context, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 9:46:32 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: thorkraki
As a new believer I have been reading these posts on this issue with a lot of interest. Maybe I am too new to make a statement, but I prayed about this, and here is what I think:
At least for me, right now, salvation for babies, those who never heard the Gospel, people who were maybe born without the mental capacity to understand, and so on, is a question that I cannot answer for sure, either by reason or by Scripture.
But reason and Scripture do tell me that God is infinitely just and good, and part of my faith is to have faith the He will do justice by these people.
Thor
Thor, welcome to the thread, and the family of God!
I think you've got a pretty solid start.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 10:26:58 AM
|
|
|
thorkraki
Posts: 102
Joined: 6/17/2008
Status: offline
|
Thank you! Everyone here has been very supportive and I keep finding all sorts of interesting things to read and discuss!
Thor
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 11:16:43 AM
|
|
|
JTA090702
Posts: 1
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
|
I AM A MOTHER OF TWO BOYS, 9 YEARS OLD AND 10 MONTH OLD. NEITHER OF MY CHILDREN HAVE BEEN BAPTIZED, NOT SAYING THAT IN THE FUTURE THAT WILL NOT BE, BUT FOR THE MOMENT THEY ARE NOT. I FEEL DEEP IN MY HEART AND FROM MY UPBRINGINGS THAT MY CHILDREN WILL GO TO HEAVEN IF SOMETHING WOULD HAPPEN TO THEM. THIS DOES NOT COME FROM A VERSE OR ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES, JUST MY BELIEF AND FAITH IN GOD!!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 3:21:39 PM
|
|
|
sunofone
Posts: 506
Joined: 10/11/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
demonstrate why a word is exclusive if you think so. From the context, of course. This is my last ditch effort to communicate the proper understanding of the verse you put forth,and I addressed earlier.
If I say to a group of ten people all of you are guilty of sin and now all of you must pay the penalty.As this relates to salvation tell me where I can place period,and stop talking.
I can't stop and put a period here because I haven't given the good news yet.The good news is that I have died for all of your sins,so your debt is paid in full.Can I put a period here?
Well no wait there's more,the debt is applied to all of you who believe.
Am I still talking to all ten people? Yes, yet not all of them will be the recipient of this kind act right?
So who is the debt good for? It is good for all who believe.
The argument that Jesus died for everyone is a moot point except you're defending the UR position.Because if his death does not atone for the sins of everyone,then his atonement was not for all.It was only for all who believe.
Lets say it all in reverse.I died for all of you who believe on me so that you don't have to.I died for all of you here so that you don't have to.All of you here are guilty of sin and will now have to pay the penalty for it.
Which sentence among the three can stand alone?Which sentence contains the whole truth of the matter?I say that all clearly refers to all who believe.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 4:35:06 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sunofone
quote:
demonstrate why a word is exclusive if you think so. From the context, of course. This is my last ditch effort to communicate the proper understanding of the verse you put forth,and I addressed earlier.
If I say to a group of ten people all of you are guilty of sin and now all of you must pay the penalty.As this relates to salvation tell me where I can place period,and stop talking.
This example is irrelevant to Rom 3:23-25. Sorry you don't see that.
quote:
I can't stop and put a period here because I haven't given the good news yet.The good news is that I have died for all of your sins,so your debt is paid in full.Can I put a period here?
You can put your period any place you desire. Your example is still irrelevant to the issue.
quote:
Well no wait there's more,the debt is applied to all of you who believe.
Am I still talking to all ten people? Yes, yet not all of them will be the recipient of this kind act right?
So who is the debt good for? It is good for all who believe.
Sorry you don't see that your example is irrelevant to the issue. Please stick to the issue. iow, deal witht he passage, not an example you just came up with.
quote:
The argument that Jesus died for everyone is a moot point except you're defending the UR position.Because if his death does not atone for the sins of everyone,then his atonement was not for all.It was only for all who believe.
You simply fail to grasp that His death was for everyone; in fact He bought (agorazo) eternal life for everyone. But...apart from receiving that eternal life through faith (John 1:12) not everyone will have it. My support for His buying eternal life for everyone can be seen from 1 Cor 6:20 and 7:23, speaking of Corinthian believers, compared with 2 Pet 2:1, which says He "bought" even false teachers who deny Him.
quote:
Lets say it all in reverse.I died for all of you who believe on me so that you don't have to.I died for all of you here so that you don't have to.All of you here are guilty of sin and will now have to pay the penalty for it.
Your example fails to deal with the truth. Here is truth, from your example:
"I died for all of you so that you don't have to, even though all of you are guilty of sin. Whoever believes on Me will not die (John 11:25-27). Whosoever does not believe in Me will die in their sins (John 8:24)."
quote:
Which sentence among the three can stand alone?Which sentence contains the whole truth of the matter?I say that all clearly refers to all who believe.
Never mind your sentences. Please elaborate on what you disagree with in my bolded sentence, which is the truth found in Scripture. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 5:40:56 PM
|
|
|
sunofone
Posts: 506
Joined: 10/11/2007
Status: offline
|
Hey freewill,thanks again for your response.I saw the scripture you posted in bold.Thanks for providing it.Unless the tenor of our discussion changes,or God convicts me to continue our discussion I'm bowing out.I bid you well,and may God continue to richly bless you.Thanks, Steve
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 5:50:57 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sunofone
Hey freewill,thanks again for your response.I saw the scripture you posted in bold.Thanks for providing it.Unless the tenor of our discussion changes,or God convicts me to continue our discussion I'm bowing out.I bid you well,and may God continue to richly bless you.Thanks, Steve
Steve,
I'm sorry you think there is something wrong with my "tenor". I'm just being straightforward with you.
I was hoping you would have a response to the sentences I bolded, since they are directly related to well known verses.
Since you think I am wrong, I was hoping you would be able to show me how my sentences are wrong, but I guess I'll never know.
btw, I am not "freewill". Although I am convinced it is found throughout the Bible.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 7:24:24 PM
|
|
|
sunofone
Posts: 506
Joined: 10/11/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: sunofone
Hey freewill,thanks again for your response.I saw the scripture you posted in bold.Thanks for providing it.Unless the tenor of our discussion changes,or God convicts me to continue our discussion I'm bowing out.I bid you well,and may God continue to richly bless you.Thanks, Steve
Steve,
I'm sorry you think there is something wrong with my "tenor". I'm just being straightforward with you.
I was hoping you would have a response to the sentences I bolded, since they are directly related to well known verses.
Since you think I am wrong, I was hoping you would be able to show me how my sentences are wrong, but I guess I'll never know.
btw, I am not "freewill". Although I am convinced it is found throughout the Bible.
I thought it would be pointless to respond to it.So I opted to let it go.But since you asked nicely I'll respond to your sentence
I didn't get the point of the reference of John 11 vs 25-27 So you'll have to come again.As for John 8: 24 it goes hand in hand with the verses I pointed out when Jesus addressed the audience he addressed as the children of Abraham.Context,is once again key.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 7:49:22 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sunofone
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: sunofone
Hey freewill,thanks again for your response.I saw the scripture you posted in bold.Thanks for providing it.Unless the tenor of our discussion changes,or God convicts me to continue our discussion I'm bowing out.I bid you well,and may God continue to richly bless you.Thanks, Steve
Steve,
I'm sorry you think there is something wrong with my "tenor". I'm just being straightforward with you.
I was hoping you would have a response to the sentences I bolded, since they are directly related to well known verses.
Since you think I am wrong, I was hoping you would be able to show me how my sentences are wrong, but I guess I'll never know.
btw, I am not "freewill". Although I am convinced it is found throughout the Bible.
I thought it would be pointless to respond to it.So I opted to let it go.But since you asked nicely I'll respond to your sentence
I didn't get the point of the reference of John 11 vs 25-27 So you'll have to come again.As for John 8: 24 it goes hand in hand with the verses I pointed out when Jesus addressed the audience he addressed as the children of Abraham.Context,is once again key.
The point of referencing John 11:25-27 in the sentence I provided is my sentence contains the very words of Jesus when talking to Martha. Here is the passage:
Jesus said to her, "I am the recurrection and the file; he who believes in Me shall live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this? She said to him, "yes, Lord; I have believed that You are the Christ, the Son of God, even He who comes into the world."
The reason I was not dealing with the 3 sentences you provided is that they weren't relevant (specific) to the issue. I provided my sentence to address specifically the issue.
Again, what is in my sentence from post #139 that you disagree with? Here it is again:
"I died for all of you so that you don't have to, even though all of you are guilty of sin. Whoever believes on Me will not die (John 11:25-27). Whosoever does not believe in Me will die in their sins (John 8:24)."
John 8:24 is a direct warning that Jesus gave a crowd of Jews. What is the point of giving a warning if the ones warned are unable to do anything about it? That is one of the questions that reformed theology cannot answer properly.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 8:40:34 PM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1827
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ezra
When it comes to those who are incapable of responding to the Gospel, we must be clear that Christ was the propitiation for the sins of THE WHOLE WORLD.
Aren't people judged worthy of hell for not believing?
how can one be judged worthy of hell for not being able to believe?
Exactly. God is a righteous Judge, and Christ has made full atonement for every sinner. Do we really understand what Christ accomplished on the Cross, and do we really understand the heart of God?
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 8:57:28 PM
|
|
|
FolkSingerBlues
Posts: 554
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline
|
It's hard to discuss issues like this without it Calvinism or Arminianism rearing it's head in some form.
I don't want to stir that bucket up.
I will say that those on either side (and those like myself that believe both doctrines are flawed) acknowledge that such doctrine has a huge effect on how we approach and hear Scripture.
Acknowledgment of such impact should encourage all of us to reflect on such approach.
I for one try to take God at his word "I will be who I will be."
_____________________________
My New Blog site
Proof texting is a very dangerous thing...If we were given the Scriptures it was to humble us into realizing God is right and the rest of us are just guessing.
-Rich Mullins
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 10:24:53 PM
|
|
|
sunofone
Posts: 506
Joined: 10/11/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
The point of referencing John 11:25-27 in the sentence I provided is my sentence contains the very words of Jesus when talking to Martha. Here is the passage:
Jesus said to her, "I am the recurrection and the file; he who believes in Me shall live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this? She said to him, "yes, Lord; I have believed that You are the Christ, the Son of God, even He who comes into the world."
The reason I was not dealing with the 3 sentences you provided is that they weren't relevant (specific) to the issue. I provided my sentence to address specifically the issue.
Again, what is in my sentence from post #139 that you disagree with? Here it is again:
"I died for all of you so that you don't have to, even though all of you are guilty of sin. Whoever believes on Me will not die (John 11:25-27). Whosoever does not believe in Me will die in their sins (John 8:24)."
John 8:24 is a direct warning that Jesus gave a crowd of Jews. What is the point of giving a warning if the ones warned are unable to do anything about it? That is one of the questions that reformed theology cannot answer properly.
Thanks. Thanks for clarifying that for me FG.Here's my direct answer and then I must provide some commentary  Sorry! I know I can be wordy,I'll try to work on that.LOL
I disagree with the first part of your sentence.Now for the commentary.
Jesus was speaking to Martha who was distraught that Jesus was late in responding to the news that Lazarus was sick resulting in his death.I know you know this so I don't mean to suggest that I'm teaching you something,I'm just trying to provide context is all.
Martha being sad that her brother was now dead was upset that Jesus was responsible for his death(Her conclusion,not mine)She then says to Jesus even now God will give you what you desire,yet when Jesus says to her your brother will rise again,she believes he is speaking about the resurrection of the last day.
Jesus then says to her the verse which you quoted.The verse as in most verses has a literal interpretation and a broader spiritual application.Martha gives no impression that she understood the literal application,she seems to have received it's broader spiritual application though.
Vs 38 - 40 bears this out:9 "Take away the stone," he said. "But, Lord," said Martha, the sister of the dead man, "by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days." 40 Then Jesus said, "Did I not tell you that if you believed, you would see the glory of God?"
When Jesus spoke the words you quoted he was first speaking specifically about the situation at hand.That he had within his power to resurrect the dead,because he was in fact the resurrection and the life.When he finished speaking he asked her if she believed this.
She said yes,but clearly she had no idea what he was referring too.This is the danger of hearing the word but not hearing it.If you walk away after hearing this verse believing that Jesus during this momentous occasion was talking about him being the savior of all men,then I'm afraid you too like Martha have failed to understand what Jesus was saying here.
Jesus was telling Martha that if you believe in me,I can raise your brother back from the dead.Mary believed that Jesus could ask his father to do this and God would grant his request,she had no idea that Jesus himself was capable of raising Lazarus.
This is the literal interpretation of this verse.Now applying it more broadly,Jesus is saying to those who believe in me,not all people,exclusively those who believe in me,though they die physically,yet will they live,and in this believing the one who is living, physically alive will never die,spiritually that is obviously not physically.
Jesus was speaking first specifically to Martha about this specific situation,and the broader context applies only to believers,not all people.
Here again is reality.If Jesus death atoned,payed the penalty for all,then all are saved.Period,end of discussion,let's join forces with the UR and call it a day.If on the other hand his death although effective enough to cover all people in fact covers only those who believe.Then it is correct to say that Jesus death was for believers only,not everybody.
Jesus said it himself,That he lays down his life for the sheep.The sheep who knows him,and whom he knows,emphasis being not all sheep know him,are capable of hearing and responding to his voice,only his sheep hear his voice.It is for those sheep that he gladly lays down his life for.
That's all I've got FG.I can't make it any plainer.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/19/2008 11:47:20 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5940
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ezra
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ezra
When it comes to those who are incapable of responding to the Gospel, we must be clear that Christ was the propitiation for the sins of THE WHOLE WORLD.
Aren't people judged worthy of hell for not believing?
how can one be judged worthy of hell for not being able to believe?
Exactly. God is a righteous Judge, and Christ has made full atonement for every sinner. Do we really understand what Christ accomplished on the Cross, and do we really understand the heart of God?
The above is based on the idea that intellect is key to salvation... Man isn't born with the means to believe... So everyone should be saved right?
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/20/2008 12:06:55 AM
|
|
|
sunofone
Posts: 506
Joined: 10/11/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
The above is based on the idea that intellect is key to salvation... Man isn't born with the means to believe... So everyone should be saved right?
John My point exactly John.If infants are granted salvation on the basis of them being unable to choose,then we need to keep adding to the list.Mentally handicapped,spiritually blind,death,Oh shucks that includes everybody doesn't it!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? - 6/20/2008 2:49:02 AM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1827
Status: offline
|
quote:
Man isn't born with the means to believe... So everyone should be saved right?
Because all men are sinners who are spiritually dead, God has made provision through the preaching of the Gospel and the working of the Holy Spirit to bring saving faith to human hearts (Rom. 1:16;10:17). Only those who believe and repent receive the gift of the Holy Spirit and are saved (Acts 2:38-41; 3:19,20;10:44-48).
God has commanded that the Gospel be preached to "every creature" (Mk. 16:15,16) and He now commands all men everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30). That is why the Bible speaks of "obedience to the Gospel".
All those capable of "hearing" the Gospel will be held accountable for either believing or not believing it (Mk. 16:15,16; Jn.3:36; 20:31).
However, Scripture has not stated what God will do about those incapable of "hearing" or understanding the Gospel (which has already in published in every known language). God has His reasons for not disclosing this, but that does not imply that He has made no provision, since God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son (Jn. 3:16).
Since infants are incapable of acknowledging that they are sinners in need of the Savior, and cannot respond to the Gospel, if they die God has made some provision for them through the atoning work of Christ, since He is the Righteous Judge. What we do know without the shadow of a doubt is that the Son of Man came to seek and to save that which was lost, and He also took away the sin of the world. That should be sufficient.
< Message edited by Ezra -- 6/20/2008 3:00:55 AM >
_____________________________
And whosoever will, le | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
