The L In The TULIP Doctrine

[tyndale1946]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>A special atonement is taught in all types. Is it not a fact that the
lamb which Israel slew just before they left Egypt was for a special people?
Is it not a fact that it benefited none but God's chosen people? No man on
earth can prove that Christ made an atonement for the whole race of Adam ;
but the Bible does teach that He died for His people, and that He has can-
celled their great debt. "Who can lay anything to the charge of God's elect?"
Indeed I am a great sinner, but if Christ died for me, I have a great Saviour.
What can condemn me? Who shall separate me from His love? "He that spared
not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not also with
Him freely give us all things? If God delivered His darling Son to death, if
he let Him groan, bleed and die for me, will He withhold anything from me?
So dear little child of God if you feel that you have any interest in this
precious One, His blood having been spilt for you, you have solid ground to
base your hope on, ground that cannot be shaken. The blood of jesus cleanses us from sin.

Says One, "You understand, then. that election, predestination, and the
atonement all cover the ground?" Yes, this is the way I understand it. God is
equal in all His ways. All for whom Christ died will some day live in Heaven,
whether they ever hear the gospel or not. The gospel is only the sweet story
of the cross. Millions will never hear of it in this world, but in heaven they
will all sing that sweet song, "By thy blood thou hast redeemed." He is as
much the Saviour of the infant as of the adult. There is no other name given
under heaven nor among men whereby we must be saved. Well might the
poet say,

Dear dying Lamb, thy precious blood
Shall never lose its power,
Til all the ransomed church of God
Be saved to sin no more.

Let the song of redeeming love be sung around my bed when I come to
die, and let it be the first to greet my ears in heaven. I love the doctrine of a
full and complete atonement in Christ. There is no defect in my precious
Lord. In him all fulness dwells. his blood is the only antidote for sin.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This sermon was from one of our Old Line Primitive Baptist preachers in the 1800's Elder S.N. Redford... I feel he says it all and will let it stand as him and I are of like precious faith... Brother Glen smile.gif

[Monergist]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>All for whom Christ died will some day live in heaven, whether they hear the gospel or not. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've appreciated the content of these posts so far, but am I missing something here? I hope he's not saying what I think he's saying. For it's the gospel which is the power of God unto salvation. Where in the N.T. do we have God effecting salvation apart from the gospel?

Again, I've benefitted from these. I hope that I am misreading this.

Tim :confused:

[Ray Berrian]

The view of limited atonement leads to many,many, other non-spiritual errors. This is one of them. 'All for whom Christ died will someday live in Heaven, whether they hear the Gospel or not.'

I Timothy 2:4 says in the Greek, 'Who wishes all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. And in verse 6 God says, 'Who gave Himself a ransome for all, to be testified in due time.' Believing in Jesus opens the doors of the human heart to everlasting life. Just a sampling of [Ray's beliefs] . . . A limited atonement is in counterdistinction to the Word of God.

"Ray"

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

[tyndale1946]

No you read him right... Gospel means... Good News... What better news is there than Christ paid for your sins? Do you have to hear it to be saved?... No! God is God and if you have been following the doctrine called the TULIP you will see nothing saves eternally but the blood of Jesus The Christ.

Not the Gospel, or baptism, or works. You do these things because you are already saved not to get saved. I know you were brought up to believe that the Gospel has saving possibilities but the scriptures state it is only to feed sheep. God is the only one that can make a sheep and has never needed man to help him in the creation process... Naturally or Spiritually... Brother Glen smile.gif

[Monergist]

Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Mark 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Mark 16:15-16 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Acts 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

Romans 1:16-17 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

Romans 10:15-17 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Romans 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

I Cor. 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

I Cor. 4:15 ...for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

II Cor 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ'

Ephesians 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with the holy Spirit of promise.

II Timothy 2:14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

II Timothy 1:10 But now is made manifest by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

And we could go on. I'll just ask my question again: where in the N.T. does God ever effect salvation apart from the Gospel?

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: TimothyW ]

[Christopher]

Limited Atonement

Christ died for his sheep, and his death secures their salvation. It should be noted that not all men are Christ's sheep. Jesus said to the unbelieving Jews, "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." [Jhn. 10:26]; He that is of God heareth God’s words; ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.” [John. 8:47] Belief does not make one a sheep but reveals that one is a sheep. Jesus said that a good shepherd gives his life for the sheep, and that is what he done -

"I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep." [John. 10:11]

"As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep. And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold and one shepherd." [Jhn. 10:15-16]

Jesus had sheep of another fold, referring to the Gentiles, and said that they would hear His voice. Notice, Jesus said "...other sheep I HAVE..." not "WILL HAVE." Just as 1 John 5:12 - "He that HATH the Son HATH life..." Notice, it states "HATH ETERNAL LIFE." That means they currently possess it; I have heard Armenians use 1 John 5:12 to support eternal security, but never John 10:15-16 to support its true meaning. They were his sheep even though they had not yet been brought the gospel. Christ’s sheep are already chosen, not waiting to be chosen. Christ’s sheep are his sheep even though they may be scattered and not yet in the fold. God was not, by the death of His son, hoping to obtain children. God already has His children and they have been His from the foundation of the world. The purpose of Jesus’ death was to bring those children back to God and deliver them from the world. If Christ died for all mankind, then all mankind will be saved from the world.

“As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out my sheep, and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day.” [Eze. 34:12]

“And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.” [Jhn 11:51-52]

“Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father.” [Gal. 1:4]

“Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.” [Tit. 2:14]

"He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth." [Rom. 8:32-33]

Jesus came to seek and to save His sheep, and He done just that. To say that Jesus did not secure the salvation of His sheep is to say that Jesus Christ was a failure.

“For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.” [Jhn. 19:10]

Jesus did not die to maybe save some people from their sins, but to save his people from their sins.

“And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.” [Mat. 1:21]

To say that God cannot accomplish His plan of redemption unless mortal man cooperates is to diminish the sovereignty of God. God will accomplish His plan of redemption because God's will is sovereign and cannot be changed by man.

"And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?" [Dan. 4:35]

"In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:" [Eph. 1:11]

The elect were reconciled to God by the death of His Son. If Jesus died for all mankind, then every member of Adam's fallen race would be reconciled to God, all heirs of eternal life.

“For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.” [Rom. 5:10]

Limited atonement is not unjust, as God is not obligated to save any man. Those who oppose the doctrine of limited atonement charge God with being unfair by not providing everyone with an opportunity to salvation. But unlimited atonement, the doctrine that Christ died for everyone, is also unfair because it does not provide everyone with an equal opportunity to that universal salvation. Unlimited atonement teaches that Christ made salvation possible for all but secure for none. Limited atonement teaches that Christ, by His death, purged His people from their sins, victorious unto this end!

"Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;" [Heb. 1:3]

Here again, if Jesus died for all mankind, then all mankind's sins are purged and in a perfect relationship with God. This is obviously not true.

[Pastor Larry]

God does not save people apart from the preaching of the word. To suggest that people are saved without hearing the gospel message is false teaching. 1 Peter 1 says that we are born again through the word that was preached to us, the living and enduring word of God.

Propitiation is often misunderstood. Ray has said that propitiation made salvation possible. However, in biblical terms, propitiation is never used of a possibility but of an actuality. When Christ made propitiation for sin, he satisfied the wrath of God. It was not a potential satisfaction, it was an actual satisfaction. 1 John 2:2 asserts that whatever Christ did for us (believers), he also did for the world. Ray's theology is true based on his understanding of propitiation. Ray's understanding of propitiation is unfortunately for him, not supported in Scripture.

[tyndale1946]

You say the the Gospel has saving capabilities eternally. Tell me what Gospel the written word did the Apostles preach from? Did they roll out a scroll of the Old Testment and speak from Isaiah? Maybe the spoke from the Prophet Jeremias? Maybe Moses and the law?

They were indued with power from on high and had no other helps than from the Lord who with the Holy Ghost gave them what to say, how to say it, and prepared the hearers to hear it.

Did hearing the Gospel save those who were in spiritual darkness? Yes but not eternally as it saved them from error and untruths and unbelief which ran rampant in the early church. If you don't believe it read Apostle Pauls admonition to the Galatians who had been bewitched. They were established in the truth but someone turned the doctrine into untruths. O foolish Galatians who hath bewitched you!

You can believe the Gospel saves eternally but that is unsound doctrine! I won't argue each scripture you quoted but if you read between the lines you will see the Gospel has no eternal saving properties. The Living Word is the only one that saves eternally... The written word tells you the beautiful story of what the Living Word did for his children... Brother Glen smile.gif

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

[Calvinist Dude]

TimothyW said:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I've appreciated the content of these posts so far, but am I missing something here? I hope he's not saying what I think he's saying. For it's the gospel which is the power of God unto salvation. Where in the N.T. do we have God effecting salvation apart from the gospel?

Again, I've benefitted from these. I hope that I am misreading this. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you're missing the context of what he's saying by leaving out his very next statement:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Millions will never hear of it in this world, but in heaven they will all sing that sweet song, "By thy blood thou hast redeemed." He is as much the Saviour of the infant as of the adult. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So in context, he's referring to infant salvation. Reformed theology has always taught that infants get saved the same way as everyone else, by faith in Christ's atoning work. They may not be able to articulate or express that faith, but it's there nonetheless. Any other teaching, such as the unscriptural "age of accountability", asserts another way of salvation apart from God's grace through faith in Christ (i.e., a salvation because of an infant's lack of knowledge of its sinfulness). The Bible is clear that all stand guilty before God from conception onwards. Anything less is Pelagianism.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me--Psalm 51:5 (NKJV) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The Bible couldn't be more clear than that. But if infants are born in sin, can they be saved as infants? The reformed position says yes. Since salvation is wrought solely by the grace of God alone, then the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit can occur in anyone's heart, even an infant's. At that point, God can bestow the faith required for them to be saved just as he does with adults. Thus, a rejection of Calvinism leads one to the "age of accountability" theory since salvation becomes dependent upon a person's free will, and infants cannot exercise the will to believe. The question then to answer is this: Does the Bible teach that infants can be saved? It certainly seems to imply this in Psalm 22: 9-10:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> But You are He who took me out of the womb; You made me trust while on my mother's breasts. I was cast upon You from birth. From my mother's womb, You have been my God <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Therefore, in light of the entire context of his statement that infants will be in heaven, it is certainly no stretch to say that there will be some in heaven who never even heard the gospel preached. Even someone who does advocate the "age of accountability" would still have to concede this point, since even they believe that infants go to heaven. Almost all evangelical Christians would agree that abortion is the murder of a human life, and most would also agree that that murdered baby probably went to heaven (although they might disagree as to why); thus, we all have to agree that the baby killed in the womb could not have had the possibility to hear the gospel preached. That is all that our right reverend, the Elder Redford was saying in his sermon. This shouldn't be too much of a shock to anyone. :confused:

[tyndale1946]

Elder Redford meant what he said and said what he meant. I will give you three senarios the first was the infant that died in the womb or was still born.

I have a Deaf Son and you can preach the Gospel to him until you are blue in the face and he can't hear you.

Then there is the savage in the deepest jungle of the earth he has never heard the Gospel either.

Now what you are trying to tell me is these are special cases the baby and the Deaf Son as neither has heard the Gospel that you know of but they are saved because they couldn't help their condition? Wouldn't the savage also apply as he never had the opportunity to hear the Gospel or because he's a savage is he damned to hell and everlasting torment because some missionary got lost and couldn't find him... To Bad!

How do you know God didn't speak to that babies heart, or the heart of my Deaf Son, or the heart of the savage in the jungle? Just because we can't see the work of God does that mean he's not working?

There are to many assumptions that are not scriptural. Why make allowance on certain individuals when we were all under sin... No exceptions!

Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

That doesn't look like the Lord needs any help from me and as far as using the Gospel as a mode for eternal salvation that is what the world teaches not what God does according to scripture... Brother Glen smile.gif

[ February 16, 2002: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

[ February 16, 2002: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

[Monergist]

I would affirm the Reformed view of infant salvation. I have no problem with the Reformed doctrine of Limited Atonement, for that is what I believe the Bible teaches. And I understand the purpose of the gospel in feeding the sheep.

But what is being stated here goes beyond the teaching of scripture. By implication, it makes unneccessary and inappropriate the works of evangelism and missions. I refuse to believe for a moment that the lives of Hudson Taylor, William Carey, David Brainerd, and a host of others, many who've endured hardships and fiery persecution, spent their live's work on vain.

I've heard before that PB's were often Calvinistic, but not Reformed, and wondered why. Now I know.

[Monergist]

A Primer on Hyper-Calvinism (http://www.gty.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm)

[Christopher]

I am not going to argue the acts of God in the salvation of little children. I will, however, state what Jesus said -

"But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." [Matt. 19:14]

God has everything under control. I believe that every little child that dies is safe in the arms of Jesus. As to what age one has to reach before they are considered guilty for their own sinfil nature, I do not know. I do not think it is fruitful to harp on such minor things when there are some Armenians on this board who do not correctly understand salvation. I also believe what Paul said -

"For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion." [Rom. 9:15]

-Christopher

[Eric B]

I think this further shows that we are going way over our heads in speculation. In either Calvinism or non-Calvinism, the doctrine of those who bnever heard is really difficult. Now, non-Calvinists are always accused of opposing Calvinism because they don't like the doctrine, but the idea of people being saved apart from the Gospel, I would really like to believe, but there is not enough scriptural warrant for it.
I see paeople saying the elect were always saved, but then in that case, were they ever really under any condemnation to be saved from in the first place?
If there's no age of accoutability, then the non-elect stillborn, aborted, etc, are virtually created in Hell. While infants do have the sin nature, the Bible says it's WORKS (not the nature itself) that people are condemned by. The nature simply causes us to commit those works.

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eric B:
I the doctrine of those who bnever heard is really difficult. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No it is not. Those who do not hear the message will not be saved. Faith (which is necessary for salvation) comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of Christ (Rom 10:17). It has pleased God by the foolishness of message preachec to save those who believe. There is no other way.

As for babies, there is some evidence from the life of David that babies who die do go the heaven. It is not conclusive to be sure but it is evidence. God seems to act in this way. We could thus argue that all babies who die are elect and go to heaven. However, we could equally argue that all babies who die are non-elect and do not go to heaven. Eric is right on one thing: on this we are speculating.

Arminians have a really hard time because they don't understand the doctrine of election. God works election through the preaching of his word (1 Thess 1:4ff). The man in Africa who does not receive the message will not be saved, will not go to heaven. Had they been elect, they would have heard the gospel.

This point proves Ray's and Eric's and some others theory on partiality wrong. If God gives a greater opportunity to be saved those who were born in a society where the gospel is preached while not giving an equal chance to those in societies where it is not preached, then he would be being partial to the rich, those who live in developed societies. God is not partial as they are fond of reminding us. Therefore, the elect person in the jungle will be saved by the preaching of the word just as the elect in New York City. And the non-elect in New York City will not be saved just as certainly as the non-elect in the Amazon jungle.

[Christopher]

Edited because it is off topic for this thread. Would probably fit better under General Baptist Discussions. Please keep this thread on topic.

Larry

[ February 16, 2002: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

[Christopher]

Christopher,

This thread is on the "L in Tulip Doctrine." Your posts have nothing to do with that topic. This thread has veered a bit off and we need to steer it back toward the topic. If you would like to discuss the topic of this post, please start a new thread for it and those who wish to join can pitch in there.

Also, it would be helpful to summarize the salient points of Pyle's article so as to make a shorter post. That way it will be easier to read and discuss. Long posts are difficult to follow and usually don't get read.

Larry
Moderator

[ February 16, 2002: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

[tyndale1946]

The Atonement is Limited to only his elect and I'm glad we don't know who they are. God has an operation of grace but brethren there are no free offers. I worship a God of purpose and he says his ways are higher than our ways and his thoughts are higher than our thoughts.

It doesn't matter what we all think with your doctrine multiplied billions have already perished in the falmes of eternal torment because they didn't hear the preached word. No thank you I will leave my Salvation in the hands of almighty God who will not fail.

God will preach his eternal salvation and our dependence on him in each and every heart of every child of God and thats where I will leave it. I will leave the Gospel to feed the sheep as its intended and not try to make one. That brethren is Limited Atonement and applies to only those that Jesus died for and not one more... Brother Glen smile.gif

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[tyndale1946]

Before we proceed any further I want to make a statement to all the christian gentlemen here. I am presenting the TULIP doctrine and that is all! This post is not meant to try to convert anyone to our point of view. I am just stating what I and others like me believe and that is my only purpose. I appreciate what has been said here so far and the attitude and composure of those who have posted so far.

If others don't agree with me that is ok as I have been where they are now and understand. I know that even among my own brethren we can both be looking at the same scripture and see something different. I have learned a lot from many of you here and thank God that the journey has been benefical to me thus far and hope the same is true for you.

I appreciate those who have refered us to various web sites and considered their points of view. I use this as my rule of thumb when taking to other christians... "Consider what I say and the Lord giveth thee the understanding in all things."... Brother Glen smile.gif

[tyndale1946]

He could be regenerated and never hear the Gospel. What about the two thieves that were crucified with Jesus. Where is the written Gospel? The Living Word was there but notice there was a change in only one man. Why?

They both railed on him, If thou be the Son Of God save thyself and us. When did the regeneration take place? Who regenerated that man so he could say we deserve our punishment but this Man has done nothing.
Lord remember me when thou comest into thy Kingdom... This day shalt thou be with me in paradise. Looks to me like one man was of the elect... Limited Atonement... The other one was not.

I hear some say we need to throw down the Gospel rope of eternal salvation to pull that dead alien sinner out of the grave. There is only one problem with this senario the one that says throw down the Gospel rope is in the same grave as the one it is being thrown down too. Those who benefit by Limited Atonement are those regenerated by the Holy Ghost alone without any help from man.

I understand Limited Atonement this way that it is the baptism of the Holy Ghost and with fire. Those who are partakers of this baptism by the Lord alone are the elected, regenerated children of God. Their sins are covered by the blood of the sinless Lamb Of God and they are the only children embraced in his Limited Atonement and none else... Brother Glen smile.gif

[Mikayehu]

The "L" in "TULIP" is certainly the most difficult of the points of Calvinism because it seems to contradict certain statements in Scripture, as Ray pointed out. However, the Arminian position is no better for it also seems to contradict certain passages.

First in regards to the whole being saved apart from the gospel issue, I hope we are just defining things differently. The Bible certainly is clear that an exposure to the gospel is a prerequisite for faith. The gospel (in Christ) is the object of saving faith. No faith in Christ, no salvation, period. Now Paul is clear in II Corinthians that the same gospel is an aroma of life to one group of people and a stench of death to another. The gospel, apart from the divine working of the Holy Spirit saves no one, but the gospel is God's determined means of bringing someone to saving faith.

Anyway, to the main point. What do we do when we are presented with two groups of passages that seem to contradict? We use the analogy of faith. In this case, we look at those doctrines of Scripture which are inextricably linked with the atonement.
1. The Council of Redemption - Scripture presents us with an event in eternity past where the Trinity "planned" redemption. We do know that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not on three different missions. The Father only decided to save some and the Holy Spirit only regenerates some. The Son was not sent on a mission different from the other two.
2. Union with Christ - Scripture also presents us as being in Christ from the foundation of the world. In God's justice, we died in Christ and were resurrected in Christ, because we were in Him. The idea of a non-particular redemption seems to play havoc with the very clear doctrine of our union with Christ. The non-elect were not in Christ. Christ was not dying for them.
3. Priesthood of Christ - Scripture is very clear that intercession and atonement are done to the same degree and extent by a priest. When the priest offered an atonement he interceded for only the group of people whom he had just offered the sacrifice for. John 17 presents intercession as limited to the elect. We would have to abandon the clear teaching of the priestly work to then assume that the atonement is then somehow equal for all.
4. Essence of atonement - This goes along with something that Pastor Larry mentioned earlier. An atonement is an actual substitution, just like propitiation is not potential but actual. By Scriptures own definitions you can't have an "ineffective atonement"
5. Effects - Propitiation, Reconciliation, and Redemption are all immediate consequences of Atonement. Scripture knows nothing of Atonement without reconciliation. Therefore we are left with either universalism (which is a heresy) or particular redemption. If Christ's work was truly atoning, you can't have a man judged for what was atoned for.

Now, with an understanding of the nature of the atonement and the doctrines to which it is closely related, I approach these "contradicting" passages. I believe particular redemption is the only position which is in keeping with the analogy of faith which is central to the interpretation of Scripture.

In closing, I would like to note that everyone believes in "Limited Atonement"; the only question is "how is it limited?" It is either limited in its POWER ([Arminianism] because it cannot save without the addition of something else) or in its SCOPE (Calvinism). "Particular redemption" is a much better term.

[ February 16, 2002: Message edited by: Mikayehu ]

[tyndale1946]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>In closing, I would like to note that everyone believes in "Limited Atonement"; the only question is "how is it limited?" It is either limited in its POWER ([Arminianism] because it cannot not save without the addition of something else) or in its SCOPE (Calvinism). "Particular redemption" is a much better term.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You stated that Arminianism cannot save without the addition of something and then you added the written word as the means to that salvation. I will take the Living Word that paid for my sins and hear all about how it was accomplished from the written word. I guess those who never hear the Gospel preached are just out of luck and are hellbound without a prayer... I don't know about anyone else but that's not how my God works... Brother Glen smile.gif

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tyndale1946:
You stated that Arminianism cannot save without the addition of something and then you added the written word as the means to that salvation. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dont' complain too loudly. Peter and Paul beat Mikeyehu to it a long time ago as I showed earlier.

Limited atonement does not deny or compromise the necessity of the gospel message to salvation and neither does the necessity of the gospel message compromise or deny limited atonement. We are not saying that the gospel message is efficacious to appease God's wrath. We are saying that no one knows of Christ or his need of Christ apart from it. The gospel message is absolutely necessary for man to know to believe in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

[Monergist]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pastor Larry:


The gospel message is absolutely necessary for man to know to believe in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Amen. Thank you.

A good and gracious and wise God certainly has the right to determine how he will bring life unto His elect for whom His Son died. If He chose the preaching of the Gospel, who are we to quibble with Him?

As for the thief on the cross, I can only say this: I did not, with my physical eyes, see my Savior dying for my sins, as he did. But I have seen Him there with eyes of faith; as God can, and for this sinner did, make me able to see through the reading and preaching of His Word by the life-giving power of the Holy Spirit.

[ February 16, 2002: Message edited by: TimothyW ]

[Mikayehu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tyndale1946:


You stated that Arminianism cannot save without the addition of something and then you added the written word as the means to that salvation. I will take the Living Word that paid for my sins and hear all about how it was accomplished from the written word. I guess those who never hear the Gospel preached are just out of luck and are hellbound without a prayer... I don't know about anyone else but that's not how my God works... Brother Glen smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Just for a bit of clarification, my claim was that under the Arminian system, there will be people atoned for who go to hell. I said that is a limit to the atonement's power. Under Calvinism, all those atoned for will certainly be saved (by exercising faith in Christ). Calvinism limits the scope of the atonement.

It is certainly faith in the "Living Word" that saves. As Pastor Larry has pointed out, Paul is clear that this faith cannot come apart from hearing the Gospel. As far as your remark that your God would not condemn those who had never heard the gospel preached (at least this is what I understood you as saying), I see no way around what Paul wrote in Ephesians 2 "Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world." My Gentile ancestors, for thousands of years, were without hope, because of God's purpose in separating them from Israel and the covenants. In the same way, those who are not given the message of Jesus Christ (the Gospel) will die without God and without hope. That is a very sobering statement, but it is certainly true.

[Christopher]

How can you say that someone must hear the gospel before they can be saved? What about the millions of Americans who only have a distorted view of the gospel? How close do you have to be to the true gospel before it counts?

[tyndale1946]

Take the book away... What do you have? The Lambs book of life! Take the faith of the saints away... What do you have? The Faith of The Son Of God!... Take the acceptance and rejection of Christ away and what do you have?... Irresistible Grace!... Take the works of man away trying to appease and offended God by his own righteousness and what do you have? The Son Of The Most High God, saving those elected, by the Faith of the Son, impossible to reject by his chosen, secured for all eternity in Heaven... Brother Glen smile.gif

[Eric B]

This last point also answers what Larry has said about those in "Christian" nations having a "better chance" at salvation. That is no guarantee as the whole record of Israel shows, with the gentiles being more responsive to the Gospel.
What I find funny, is that free-will advocates say anyone can be saved because this seems more fair, and this is criticized, but then here is a Calvinist also arguing based on supposed fairness. In either scenario, it doesn't seem fair to some group, so it seems we are thinking way too much about the issue of why people will be in Hell. Let's just try to get the Gospel out as much as we can.

[Mikayehu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Christopher:
How can you say that someone must hear the gospel before they can be saved? What about the millions of Americans who only have a distorted view of the gospel? How close do you have to be to the true gospel before it counts?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
We say this because this is exactly Paul's claim: Faith comes by hearing, hearing by the Word of God, the Word of God by a preacher.

[Mikayehu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tyndale1946:
Take the book away... What do you have? The Lambs book of life! Take the faith of the saints away... What do you have? The Faith of The Son Of God!... Take the acceptance and rejection of Christ away and what do you have?... Irresistible Grace!... Take the works of man away trying to appease and offended God by his own righteousness and what do you have? The Son Of The Most High God, saving those elected, by the Faith of the Son, impossible to reject by his chosen, secured for all eternity in Heaven... Brother Glen smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You are drawing a dichotomy where one can't be drawn. If you take away the acceptance of Christ, what you're left with is a lost man. That is Scriptures' teaching. What Calvinists' believe is that God's election assures that faith. But again, the bottom line is that Christ is the object of saving faith. The person and work of Christ is revealed to man in the "gospel." No gospel, no knowledge of Christ; no knowledge of Christ, no faith in Christ; no faith in Christ, no salvation (of course we can also place here no irresistable grace, no faith in Christ smile.gif).

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eric B:
That is no guarantee as the whole record of Israel shows, with the gentiles being more responsive to the Gospel.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What makes you think the Gentiles are more receptive? I don't see any evidence of that.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What I find funny, is that free-will advocates say anyone can be saved because this seems more fair, and this is criticized, but then here is a Calvinist also arguing based on supposed fairness. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This doesn't make sense. Not sure what you are trying to say here. It doesn't appear to have to do with limited atonement though so if you want to pursue this, then start a thread with it.

[Ray Berrian]

Trusting in God's sovereign election saves no one. This concept was Calvin's human error. Trusting in Christ is the defining moment in a person's life. After all election is determined by human beings, otherwise, God speaking through the Apostle Peter would not have said, to be watchful and to ' . . . make your calling and election sure; for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall.' If election comes via Divine fiat, then this would be foolish to pen these inerrent words coming from the Lord God.

"Ray"

[tyndale1946]

The point I was trying to make was take everything away and all you are left with is Christ... All Christ and nothing but Christ.
The will is the Sovereign Will of God, the love is the Sovereign Love of God, the irresistible grace is the irresistible grace of God. Bestowed on the elect of God according to his own purpose and grace... Brother Glen smile.gif

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Trusting in God's sovereign election saves no one.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The more you say, the more you seem totally out of touch with the issues involved. I am beginning to wonder if you have stuided this issue at all. No one trusts in God's sovereign election for salvation.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>After all election is determined by human beings, otherwise, God speaking through the Apostle Peter would not have said, to be watchful and to ' . . . make your calling and election sure; for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall.' If election comes via Divine fiat, then this would be foolish to pen these inerrent words coming from the Lord God.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

God did not say to elect yourself. Consider 2 Thess 2:13: God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

This is a foolish thing to say if God doesn't do the choosing. 2 Peter 1 does not say that we do the choosing. It says that we confirm to ourselves -- or make sure or evident -- our election by our growth. At least that's what hte passage plainly says.

Furthermore, where in Scripture does it say that election is determined by human beings? You keep saying this but you have yet to give a verse for it. I dropped it earlier when you refused to back up your position from Scripture. I bring up here again because you have not.

Total depravity prevents man from electing God. He chooses only himself.

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tyndale1946:
The point I was trying to make was take everything away and all you are left with is Christ... All Christ and nothing but Christ.
The will is the Sovereign Will of God, the love is the Sovereign Love of God, the irresistible grace is the irresistible grace of God. Bestowed on the elect of God according to his own purpose and grace... Brother Glen smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You cannot "take away everything but Christ" as you would argue. Belief is necessary. You cannot simply ignore the passages you don't like. God has ordained to save his elect by enabling them to believe. It does not add to Christ in anyway.

[Eric B]

They were in the beginning ("He came unto His own, and His own received Him not", etc.) This was the real "hardening" (national) spoken of in Rom.9
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> This doesn't make sense. Not sure what you are trying to say here. It doesn't appear to have to do with limited atonement though so if you want to pursue this, then start a thread with it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This was a passing statement. Just that it is a double standard to criticize free-will for arguing on "fairness" when election is being argued on fairness (to those in non-Christian environments) as well.

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eric B:
This was a passing statement. Just that it is a double standard to criticize free-will for arguing on "fairness" when election is being argued on fairness (to those in non-Christian environments) as well.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wasn't aware that anyone was arguing about "fairness." Whatever ...

[Ray Berrian]

Pastor Larry,

After a thorough study you will find that all of God's electing in eternity past was based on humankind's response to the offer of grace through the Son. Foreknowledge was the pivotal factor in deciding who to destine to everlasting life with the Son, or an endless life with the Prince of darkness. The Greek word for foreknowledge is the same as our English word, prognosis. In the medical field the physician makes a prognosis of the patients condition, he does not inflict the life threatening disease. The Lord has made the prognosis of every human being without inflicting the ‘second death on anyone' through His alleged, autocratic machinations. God always knew the bottom line of how people would respond to the call of the holy Gospel. This view demonstrates God's fairness toward His creation, while not blaspheming His goodness and Divine justice by autocratically choosing the majority to Hell and the remnant, saved to endless life with the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

For the sake of anyone not familiar with the use of James Strong's Concordance I will suggest you look on page 60 under Greek Dictionary of the New Testament on the last few pages of the concordance. The middle column number 4267 & 4268 indicates that ‘prognosis' means to know beforehand, forethought or foresee.

All of Christ's predestinating of the saved and the lost was filtered through His foreseeing either belief and unbelief in the lives of human beings.

Note Romans 8:29;11:2; Acts 2:23; I Peter 1:2 & I Peter 1:20.

Your reference coming from II Thessalonians 2:13 is interesting because the Word says, that ‘. . . God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.' The choosing was posited on the basis of ‘belief of the truth.' Once someone truly believes in Jesus Christ then the Spirit of God begins His Divine work in the human heart called sanctification. It is a most wonderful truth that all Christians have been chosen by God unto everlasting life.

For people to say that the Lord sovereignly elects the majority of people to Hell is to make the Lord a Collaborator or ally with the Evil One. The Devil wants everyone in Hell; and according to this Calvinistic, quasi-theology the Lord is actively involved bringing about the same end result. Apparently, these two rival foes are not really the adversaries that we all have been taught down through the years.

Dr. Berrian

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
After a thorough study you will find that all of God's electing in eternity past was based on humankind's response to the offer of grace through the Son. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then it should be no problem for you to cite a verse that supports it.

Ray, you claim a ThD. Why can't you understand simple English? I have asked you numerous times for a verse supporting this conclusion. One simple verse is all that is necessary. You say that a thorough study will lead me to this conclusion. If it is in Scripture, then you should have no problem giving a passage where it is taught. Yet you consistently refuse to do that. Why? You and I both know why. You refuse to give a verse because you don't have one.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The Greek word for foreknowledge is the same as our English word, prognosis. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No it is not. And you have tried this argtument before. It didn't work then and it was answered scripturally. It won't work now. One verse that disproves your theory (among others) is Romans 11:2: God foreknew his people. That very clearly refers to a choice God made, not a reaction of God to Israel's choosing him. Deut 7:7-8 back up this truth that God chose Israel. It was not IIsrael that chose God.

I again ask why, if you have a ThD, are you citing Strong's? Strong's is a very minimalistic gloss. You should be citing something more substantial than that. When you look at the lexical works, all of them clearly cite foreordination as a meaning of this word.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Your reference coming from II Thessalonians 2:13 is interesting because the Word says, that ‘. . . God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.' The choosing was posited on the basis of ‘belief of the truth.' <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is abominable exegesis. Salvation comes through sanctification of the Spirit and belief in the truth. It is not the election that does. You know better than this.

You have strayed from limited atonement. Please steer your comments back to that topic or desist from posting.

[ February 17, 2002: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

[Mikayehu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Pastor Larry,

After a thorough study you will find that all of God's electing in eternity past was based on humankind's response to the offer of grace through the Son. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I guess that depends on what you're studying smile.gif.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>All of Christ's predestinating of the saved and the lost was filtered through His foreseeing either belief and unbelief in the lives of human beings.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, you are right that the basis of election is foreknowledge, but then you procede to define foreknowledge in a way differently than the Bible defines it. The Bible nowhere speaks of God foreseeing a person's belief but of His foreknowing THEM. Your illustration of a doctor's prognosis, though interesting, is irrelevant. The text does not say that God made a prognosis of the state of man, but that he foreknew certain men. My doctor does not "know" me; he may know about my health or my fitness, but he does not know me. The Bible states that God knew ME from the foundation of the world. Any study at all of "gnosis" and "prognosis" will reveal that the terms can carry much more meaning than simple awareness of facts, but this has been more than adequately demonstrated in other threads.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Your reference coming from II Thessalonians 2:13 is interesting because the Word says, that ‘. . . God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.' The choosing was posited on the basis of ‘belief of the truth.' <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Where does the text say that basis of the choosing was belief? The text says two things. One, God chose us to salvation before we existed. And secondly, the means of salvation is through 1) The sanctification of the Spirit and 2) Belief in the truth.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>For people to say that the Lord sovereignly elects the majority of people to Hell is to make the Lord a Collaborator or ally with the Evil One. The Devil wants everyone in Hell; and according to this Calvinistic, quasi-theology the Lord is actively involved bringing about the same end result. Apparently, these two rival foes are not really the adversaries that we all have been taught down through the years. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Surely you realize the fault of this logic. There were a great host of angels that fell. Satan wants all of them in hell. God chose to save none of them. Does that make God in cohorts with Satan and a Collaborator of evil? All men have earned hell. God was under no obligation to save any of us. The marvel is that God in His infinite wisdom and for His own glory chose to give a certain group of people to His Son, and send that Son to die for them. How that can be construed to make God in cooperation with Satan is beyond me.

[tyndale1946]

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?

32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?

33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

I've heard this scripture preached in the Primitive Baptist Church more than any other. Its hard for anyone to understand how God elected his children? They think it is according to something he saw in them when he looked, some goodness he saw in them.

He elected them when there was no sin in the world, before man was ever made, elected them and gave them to his Son. In that election he also predestinated them to be conformed to the image of his Son... Predestination means he gave them a destination before time to be where the Son is... Heaven

I guess these could be called the 5 points of Salvation. They are only Limited to his elect and there is no need to belabor the point.

The Godheads Foreknowledge
The Godheads Predestination
The Godheads Calling
The Godheads Justification
The Godheads Glorification

He saved us by his grace which by definition is unmerited favor bestowed upon an unworthy object. Irresistible grace that you can't reject even if you wanted to!... Brother Glen smile.gif

[ February 18, 2002: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

[tyndale1946]

Ray and Mikayehu the question of the offer or no offer of grace is continued on Irresistible Grace the I in the TULIP Doctrine in the continuing thread... You may feel free to go there... Brother Glen smile.gif

[ February 18, 2002: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Ray Berrian]

James 2,

I am pleased that you have studied about these important issues for so long. I too, have studied these issues for 46 years. I spent four years in an Arminian Bible College and one year in a Five Point Calvinistic seminary. I received my B.D. degree in an Arminian seminary and a Th.D. from a Calvinistic seminary. I have pastored churches for about twenty three years.

For me, to have all the Word of God to dovetail in meaning and understanding, I only accept the fifth point of Calvinism which as you know is eternal security. I believe also in the depravity of man, but not total depravity. John 1:9 has convinced me of the fact that God can touch the life of a person through conscience,human intelligence and the conviction of the Holy Sprit before conversion to Christ. In other words, the Image of God is not totally effaced from the human being in spit of the fact that man is a sinner and responsible before Almighty God.

Though belief in Jesus Christ we will ' . . . be conformed to the Image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.'[Romans 8:29].

Ray

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Though belief in Jesus Christ we will ' . . . be conformed to the Image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.'[Romans 8:29].
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ray,

I don't mean to be unnecessarily pedantic here but where in Rom 8:29 (or the surrounding verses for that matter) do you see belief?

[tyndale1946]

The problem with that preacher Ray is the man you talk about who is going to believe is dead. Being dead he has the ability and is in the same condition as a dead man in a grave... None.

I want to state one thing here I never did say that election alone saved anyone and if I implied it I apologize. Election must be preceeded by the foreknowledge of God.

It is true Election never saved anyone but without Election none are saved. Everything has to work hand in hand according to Gods will and purpose. His sovereign decree and will is embraced in his promise, which is sealed in the election and predestination of his children to heaven.

He states in one place, I am God, I change not, therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. Those he elected are sealed in the promises of God who cannot lie and all he declared in Romans 8:28-29 are those promises fulfilled.

He did all this through his Son Jesus Christ without the intervention of the written Gospel. To say anything less is to say the written Gospel has eternal saving capabilities which it does not! It can save someone from error being in bondage to the law. Using the Gospel to obtain eternal salvation is not doctrinal but to hear the truths contained therein of who obtain it and stood where you never could... Is not only doctrinal but sound doctrine.

To understand Limited Atonement all one needs to do is go to the scene of the crucifiction and see the action of the two thieves. One was of the elect and one was not! The change in the one was brought on by Gods intervention. There is nothing else that could save that man... He didn't have the ability... He was hanging on a cross! The Living Word was between them both... Where was the written word or the preacher?
The only hope he had was The Son Of God to deliver him to glory. Limited Atonement in action... There was a change in one man! Why? He was one of those chosen in Christ Jesus before the world began!... This day shalt thou be with me in paradise!... Brother Glen smile.gif

[ February 19, 2002: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[tyndale1946]

James2: If its not to much of an inconvenience please list the 15 pointers... Curiosity killed the cat... I'm sure the other brethren are dying to know also... Brother Glen :D

[EPH 1:4]

No one will believe Limited Atonement until they believe man is DEAD in trespasses and sins, even a lot of Calvinists don't really believe this....but it's true...Steve

[Eric B]

The problem is, people are defining "dead" as if it were physically dead, (no consciousness in this world), but where does it say that spiritual death means one can't even choose God? This is an overgeneralized assumption. Spiritual death means we can't work our way to salvation, because we've already sinned, and we could never keep the Law if we tried. Why read anything else into this? (unless people want to believe others have no chance to escape hell)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Surely you realize the fault of this logic. There were a great host of angels that fell. Satan wants all of them in hell. God chose to save none of them. Does that make God in cohorts with Satan and a Collaborator of evil? All men have earned hell. God was under no obligation to save any of us. The marvel is that God in His infinite wisdom and for His own glory chose to give a certain group of people to His Son, and send that Son to die for them. How that can be construed to make God in cooperation with Satan is beyond me. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like I recently mentioned elsewhere, people ignore the principle of "To whom much is given, much is expected". The angels who fell were not born corrupted by sin, but were perfect. For them to turn away, they made their eternal decision, and would not be given a chance to repent. The entire problem with Calvinism is that it treats frail temporal man, who could not choose his state, as if he were one of those mighty angels, and has God deal with us just like them. As I say on my page, it would make sense if Origen's theory of all men preexisting and voluntarily falling (except for Christ) were true. (And Origen was an influence of Augustine)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> By the way, Ray, where to you get this idea of free-will in the first place? Let's see!!! You did not choose to be born, when or where or to whom to be born to, what time period of history to be born in, or anything else. Since EVERYTHING to sustain you depends on God, since you did not CREATE ANYTHING, not the air you breath, not the water you drink, not the food you eat, absolutely nothing, where do you get FREE WILL out of that? If God decided not to sustain you you would evaporate into nothingness in a split second. Wow, and you and the majority of people prattle on about "free-will."
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Connected with the same problem. Because man could not choose how he was born on earth, then he should have no choice as to where he will spend eternity either (two totally different states of existence). Once again some were created just for Hell (even though some refuse to put it this way).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Same old error. Salvation is either of God alone, or it is like all the man-made religions in history -- based on man's "choice", or to put it more directly, man trying to save himself. Might as well call on the trees for your salvation if you are going to try to save yourself. Thank God our salvation is not up to our so-called "free-will." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Once again, God must save the way we say, (with me chosen, and others not chosen) for me to honor Him as sovereign. If God ordained free will, then it is all of Him, because He chose that way, not man, and "choosing" Him is not a work to save onesself like "man-made reliegions". In fact, that is the big difference between them, bacause those other realigions all have mandatory rituals; many of them really burdensome, and still no assurance of salvation with all that. To compare a simple "choice" to this is a totally dishonest attempt to turn the other position into a straw man.

[tyndale1946]

Actually Steve Total Depravity has to be sound doctrine because if its not we are all lost. I Timothy 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. We who embrace the TULIP Doctrine in its entirety have no trouble with the word sinner. Its what we are by nature, its a condition, not only that, the wages of sin is death.

I will stand with Paul any day because what he is saying is I'm the greatest sinner who ever lived, and according to him he was. Each of us and I know I have, have had the same thoughts. Thanks be to God, we though we be sinners have the great sin bearer Our Lord and Savior Chist Jesus.

Those who can't except the doctrine of Total Depravity can't accept the label of sinner. They are insulted when you even suggest a thing and look at it as an act not a condition. Pauls declaration was that Christ came into the world to save sinners and those the Father gave him who were plunged in sin by Adam their federal head are only those in consideration. The world of his elect children.

That is why the Atonement is Limited! The sacrifice that Jesus made upon the cross was for his elect, though sinners and no one else. To say this applies to all the Adamic race of mankind is not biblical and was not Gods purpose or plan. To say they can accept or reject God in his plan is not even logical. How can man resist the creator who made him, if he is in the purpose and plan of God. It would be God resisting himself because he does the work and him alone.

Why some want to include all the Adamic race of mankind in the election is beyond me. Were is the God given election in that? Then they base that election on some goodness God saw, like we had any goodness. I won't drag out the issue any longer and let someone else reply, but until God moves the scales from our eyes we will never see Limited Atonement! Not in this life!... Brother Glen smile.gif

[tyndale1946]

I will let the other brethren respond on this as I have been accused of being one and let my other Primitive Baptist brethren who are here respond:

A hyper-Calvinist is someone who either:
Denies that the gospel call applies to all who hear, OR
Denies that faith is the duty of every sinner, OR
Denies that the gospel makes any "offer" of Christ, salvation, or mercy to the non-elect (or denies that the offer of divine mercy is free and universal), OR
Denies that there is such a thing as "common grace," OR
Denies that God has any sort of love for the non-elect.

My question is this does a book written by the hand of God, preached by those called out by him to convey his message to his children, have the power to eternally save those who hear its message?

I believe it is not the message that saves eternally but the one called Jesus Christ that saves his children apart from any act of man who is totally dead! To say anything less would be to imply it is up to the sinner who is dead to reach out and lay hold on to eternal life... All I can say to this is take your Bibles, we have a task ahead of us and the cemeteries await... Brother Glen :eek:

[Ray Berrian]

According to Calvinist theology--do all sinners have 'the Image of God in man' before they are found by Christ and are made elect by Him?

Perhaps, this is a better way of saying it. Are sinners made in the Image of God?

Ray

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
According to Calvinist theology--do all sinners have 'the Image of God in man' before they are found by Christ and are made elect by Him?

Perhaps, this is a better way of saying it. Are sinners made in the Image of God?

Ray<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. But you are avoiding the question I have been asking. Where is election said to be the result of belief? Earlier on this page (first post at the top), you quoted a passage and then injected something into the passage that is not there. Why not answer those questions instead of formulating other, irrelevant ones?

[Ray Berrian]

Pastor Larry,

Why is it important that we look for the concept of 'believing'in Romans 8? Apparently, in this chapter, God was not emphasizing this reality. God is saying that He has forseen a group of people who He has predestinated to become 'conformed to the Image of His Son.'

In Acts 2:21 & 38 God is telling sinners to 'call on the name of the Lord to be saved, and to 'repent.' The Triune God cannot call on God neither can They repent. Clearly, this is something that They are commanding that we do as human beings so we might be included in that people destined for Heaven.

If God decreed the saved and the lost, in and of itself, He would not have needed people to preach God's Word or to lead people to a time of genuine belief in Christ.

Ray

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Why is it important that we look for the concept of 'believing'in Romans 8? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Becuase you made a statement about what Rom 8 teaches. I am asking where does Rom 8 teach what you said it did. It is important because it is God's word. It is obviously less important to you because of the place you have put yourself in here. Rom 8 obviously does not teach what you said it did.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>In Acts 2:21 & 38 God is telling sinners to 'call on the name of the Lord to be saved, and to 'repent.' The Triune God cannot call on God neither can They repent. Clearly, this is something that They are commanding that we do as human beings so we might be included in that people destined for Heaven.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So? Did you think I disagreed with this? The last part is again a statement that is unsupported by Scripture. Where does it say this? You keep asserting predestination to heaven as a result of belief, yet you consistently give no Scripture for it. This is another attempt to avoid the question.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If God decreed the saved and the lost, in and of itself, He would not have needed people to preach God's Word or to lead people to a time of genuine belief in Christ. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why? This is a non-sequitur. God has decreed that the elect are saved through the preaching of the word. In fact, Paul said that the reason he endured suffering (for preaching the gospel) was so that the elect would be saved. You have taken your own ideas about what is or is not necessary rather than accepting what Scripture teaches.

Once again I will ask: What verse or verses teach that belief leads to election?

This is a simple question. Why not just answer it? You keep saying this is true but you will not provide one iota of biblical proof for it.

[tyndale1946]

Ray you repent for something you have done. If I come to your house and steal your car and then realize that this was wrong, I return your car and beg your forgiveness.

We can't repent because we have to pay the price for that repentance!... We don't have the price to pay because we are unclean. We are sinners plain and simple and any sacrifice or offering we make to God except the shed blood of The Lamb of God is unacceptable.

God will not now or ever except a sacrifice that has a blemish. He didn't in the Old Testament and he will not in The New Testament. You know the Bible Ray all sacrifices were rejected if they had a blemish. That is why Jesus drove the money changers out of the temple. They were selling unfit sacrifices to Gods children who came there to worship. They made God house a den of thieves.

Do you repent to get life or do you repent because you already have life?... Brother Glen smile.gif

[Jeff Weaver]

Bro. Glenn.

You are doing a fine job of laying out what we (Primitive Baptists) believe on the subject. I can discern no difference in what you believe and what I believe on limited atonement.

Hope all is well in San Diego.

Jeff

[ February 19, 2002: Message edited by: Jeff Weaver ]

[tyndale1946]

You mean Brother Jeff you're not going to throw me a lifeline?... I might be drowning any minute... Glug... Glug... Glug!... Brother Glen http://www.clicksmilie.de/sammlung/sport/sport027.gif

[Monergist]

Cute post, tyndale, lol.

This view of limited atonement rightfully acknowledge's God's sovereignity (well, almost), but fails to take into account His Providence. Let me expain.

Stating that the gospel couldn't be neccessary for salvation is in effect a failure to recognize the power of God in orchestrating all events to occur to accomplish His purpose. Again and again in the N.T. we see God accomplishing His purpose (salvation) through the preaching of the gospel.

Now back to the point of Sovereignity. Would God be truly Sovereign if He was unable to use human instruments (through the preaching of the gospel) to accomplish His purpose?

I'll grant that He did not have to choose this way. But He did. And I don't know why, but it must be to the praise of the glory of His grace. ;)

[tyndale1946]

Let me pose one question are there more than one type of salvation in the scriptures?... Brother Glen :confused:

_________________

Glen, why don't you start another thread with this one since it is moving away from the topic.

At five pages, this is about long enough and starting to wonder. I will close it down later today.

Larry

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

[Jeff Weaver]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>You mean Brother Jeff you're not going to throw me a lifeline?... I might be drowning any minute... Glug... Glug... Glug!... Brother Glen <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you really need one? ;) I think you are doing a fine job laying it out. I couldnt do any better, and I support you 1000%.

[Ray Berrian]

Pastor Larry,

I cannot take credit for this list of Scriptures that indicate that faith, belief, or trust in Jesus is the pivotal reality leading a sinner into a relationship with Him. When I was in Bible College in the 60's I read Dr. Robert Shank's book, "Life In the Son," which refuted eternal security. I think he was a Baptist who used to believe in this doctrine. I do, as I think you do, believe in the eternal security of the believer. So we agree about this one huge truth that Calvin got correct.

You asked me about one verse that indicates that predestination is determined by way of believing, trusting or having faith in Jesus. Here is what Dr. Shank says in his book, "Elect in the Son" written many years ago. [Bethany House Publishers; Minneapolis, MN. 55438] On page 112 he offers these verses indicating man's freedom to either accept or reject the offer of pure grace.

Matt.8:10f; Jn. 1:7,11f (the question of agency in the faith posited in Jn. 1:12 is determined by vs. 7 rather than v. 13, which properly has reference to Christ; cf, my work Life in the Son, footnote p. 91) Jn. 2:50; Jn. 3:14-18; Jn. 5:32-47; Jn. 6:32-35,51; Jn. 7:17; jn. 8:24 and context; Jn. 10:37f; Jn. 12:32, 44-50; Jn. 16:8f; Acts 10:34-43; Acts 13:38-41; Acts 14:22; Acts 17:24-34; Acts 28:23-38; Rom. 1:16-20; Rom. 3:21-5:2; Rom. 16:26; Gal. 2:16-3:29; I Thess. 2:13; I Thess. 3:1-8; I Tim. 3:4; I Tim. 4:16; II Tim. 2:12;II Tim. 2:18; II Tim. 4:1-4; Heb. 2:1-4; Heb. 3:1-4:16; Heb. 5:9; Heb. 6:4-15; Heb. 10:19-39; Heb. 11:1-12:29; Heb. 13:7-17;Jas. 1:18-21; Jas. 2:14-26; II Peter1:10f; II Peter 2 & II Peter 3:16-18; I John 1:5-2:6; I John 2:23-25,28; Jude 20f; Rev. 2:10f; Rev. 2:17; Rev. 2:25-29; Rev. 3:4-6;Rev. 3:11-13; Rev. 3:19--22; Rev. 22:l4-19.

It is very important in theology to have balance and decorum. God does teach about His sovereignty, but He also indicates that humankind has a free will. Everyone sees this if they have an open mind and are willing to be taught by the Spirit of God.

Human beings have the ability to believe in Jesus to be saved and to be numbered among His elect. As children we were taught, ‘For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever BELIEVETH in Him, shall not perish but have everlasting life.

Only Hezekiah 2:1 says, ‘He that believeth on Him shall become one of the elect.' And Hezekiah 2:9 says, ‘God has predestined and elected you to believe in His Son.'

All of Biblical understanding comes from clear thinking and staying with the meaning of the original languages projecting His truth.

Sample One: Hebrews 4:2 portrays people who heard the Gospel preached but it did no of them any good. Why? Not because God did not give them faith, but because as God has said, when they heard the truth they neglected to ‘ . . . mix their faith' with His offer of pristine grace.

Respectfully,

"Ray"

[Eric B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Those who can't except the doctrine of Total Depravity can't accept the label of sinner. They are insulted when you even suggest a thing and look at it as an act not a condition. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know who gets insulted when suggested they are a sinner. Maybe some non-believers who think they are good, but not any biblical non-Calvinists I/ve seen. It is true many of us do treat sin as purely acts more than a condition, (but some Calvinists do it too), but still, the condition doesn't necesatrily prevent anyone from repenting and calling out to God for salvation. It prevents us from being able to save ourselves through our works.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> We can't repent because we have to pay the price for that repentance!... We don't have the price to pay because we are unclean. We are sinners plain and simple and any sacrifice or offering we make to God except the shed blood of The Lamb of God is unacceptable.
God will not now or ever except a sacrifice that has a blemish. He didn't in the Old Testament and he will not in The New Testament. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is basically the error of faith as a work. You seem to be making repentance itself into a "sacrifice" for sin, but the Bible never associates the two. We don't pay the price for repentance, Christ pays the price for sins, and when we repent, His payment is applied to us.

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
I cannot take credit for this list of Scriptures that indicate that faith, belief, or trust in Jesus is the pivotal reality leading a sinner into a relationship with Him. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

None of these verses say what you have said, that belief leads to election. Every connection of faith and election has election first. There is no need for God to elect those who have already chosen him. That would be a wasted act. Election leads to belief, not belief to election. This is a fundamental truth of Scripture.

[Ray Berrian]

Pastor Larry,

You said, ‘There is no need for God to elect those who have already chosen Him. That would be a wasted act.' I agree with you in these two sentences. Almighty God has eternally known who His elect souls will be. I don't think He ever made a decision about this matter. If He did it would almost hint that He didn't know this fact at some time in the eternities past. I believe He tells us these truths in Scripture simply to give us an idea of the reality of His activity in salvation and our proceeding in this realm of Divine verities.

I was surprised that you did not have anything to say about Dr. Shank's lengthy, list of verses and corroborative evidence of man's involvement in the consummation of God's eternal salvation. These verses are worthy of everyone's consideration no matter what view we might have as to the mechanics, if you will, of humankind's response to His summons to believe or perish.

You said, 'Every connection of faith and election has election first.'

This is the point of these many verses offered by Dr. Shank. Your above statement is incorrect.

You said, 'Election lead to belief, not belief to election. This is a fundamental truth of Scripture.' Actually, this is a fundamental belief of Calvinism.

Your statement would be entirely correct if you changed a few words. 'Election does not precede belief. Belief sets in motion the electing of the sinner to become a child of God. This is a fundamental truth of Scripture.

My regards,

Ray

[Ray Berrian]

"Asleep At The Throttle"

Perhaps many did not reflect on Dr. Shank's list of Scriptures noted in the writing which began, 'I cannot take credit for this list of Scriptures. . . ' or the references Hezekiah 2:1 or 2:9. There is no Book Hezekiah in the Old Testament or in fact in the New Testament.

Ray

[Ray Berrian]

If ‘particular election' was really orthodox, Christian belief why did not God speaking through the Apostle Paul say something like this. Here was the exact timing but He failed to offer these words. ‘God was in Christ reconciling the elect to Himself . . . ' What we do find, however, in II Corinthians 5:19 is this. ‘God was in Christ, RECONCILING THE WORLD unto Himself . . . ' [Note I John 2:2] ‘ . . . He is the propitiation for our sins, and not our only, but also FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD.' Here we find monergism. Here only God was involved in the reconciling of His lost humanity.

Synergism comes into play when the Apostle Paul commits ‘ . . . unto us the word of reconciliation . . .' and says, ‘Now we are ambassadors for Christ.' Here God and man are ministering together to humanity insuring that there will be an elect people.

God alone created and offered the plan of salvation. This is monergism.

God offers His salvation to everyone, but humankind has to believe or remain in unbelief. This is synergism. Here God and man are involved in creating faith in Christ.

Respectfully,

Ray

[tyndale1946]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>God offers His salvation to everyone, but humankind has to believe or remain in unbelief. This is synergism. Here God and man are involved in creating faith in Christ.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ray if you want to believe that you are welcome to it but not me. The word offer is only applicable to The Son Of God who offered up himself to his Father for the sins of the elect only.

Romans 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

The 3rd verse is the key and their unbelief does not effect the faith of God which is in his Son Jesus Christ. He has always been able to save his elect children to the uttermost without their help in any way... Brother Glen smile.gif