Anyone agree?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by BrotherJames, Dec 10, 2007.

  1. BrotherJames

    BrotherJames
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since we must believe all of the Bible, the verses you quoted and the ones I quoted, and since we must believe that the Bible does not contradict itself, we must believe that your verses and my verses are equally true and at the same time. Thus, when The Bible says that Jesus died for the world, it is equally true as when it says that Jesus died for the elect. Thus, Jesus died both for the world and for the elect. And when the Bible says that those who believe in him will have everlasting life, it is equally true as when the Bible says that salvation is for God's elect alone. Thus, salvation is for those who believe and for God's elect.

    We must come to this logical conclusion--the only ones on this earth who believe in Christ are men and women elected unto salvation by God himself, and were predestined to become Christians before the foundations of the world. Therefore all the verses that talk about salvation by faith and belief are true. But only the elect have that faith and belief. If you and I believe in Christ, it is because God had mercy on us, and by his grace has bestowed upon us a belief and faith in him. This makes us his elect. We do not deserve it. We are no better than the world because of it. We are his elect simply because God wants us to be, and as (someone) said, so that his name will be glorified forever.

    I will now point out that a belief in Arminianism or Calvinism is irrelevant as to salvation. Just like we don't have to know how our body works in order to be a human, we do not have to know how our salvation works in order to be saved. All we have to do is believe. Is it God who gives us that belief, or is it we who grace God with our belief? In the end, it does not matter, for as long as we believe, we will be saved. That is what is important.

    (I didn't write this, a brother posted it and I was wondering what you people thought of it)
     
    #1 BrotherJames, Dec 10, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2007
  2. noregrets1987

    noregrets1987
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting topic. By the whole pre-destined idea I believe this, God is all knowing. He already knows who is going to become a follower and who is not but at the same rate he gave the option of free will to each of us. So we get to choose if we want to follow, but i believe that he states we are his elect because he already knows who will pick his path from free will because he is all knowing.

    if that made any sense..

    I have often wondered if the bible contradicts itself, and in little bits and parts It sort of does. One example is how Jesus worked / told the man at the pool and told him to get up and pick up his mat on a Sunday thus working (john ch. 5)

    Are we meant to accept that the bible contradicts itself or are we meant to accept that the words are word for word even if part of it does seem to contradict?
     
  3. BrotherJames

    BrotherJames
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    Romans 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

    Man makes mistakes, God doesn't.
     
  4. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    One interprets a verse(s) in light of all the other texts. They will aid in understanding and logical consistency.

    So if the Bible clearly and without dispute states the atonement of Christ was to purchase the salvation of God's elect, then that is what it means.

    If in another instance a verse speaks of the atonement for "all", the "all" is modified by the fact - the elect.

    Words like "all", "every", "world", etc are always modified in context. They never stand alone to mean exactly one of the twenty possible meanings.

    Everybody knows that - the word "everybody" is modified to mean something other than 6.3 billion people, isn't it? It means Christians; it means readers and students of the Word and words, etc. It doesn't mean newborn infants or mentally retarded. But we all make those "narrowing" judgments in our mind as we read that phrase, didn't we?

    I've found that reading the Bible with absolute understanding of basic truth will help interpret areas that are questionable or might seem contradictory. Let the simple and clear and without dispute help shed light and understanding on the complex.
     
  5. BrotherJames

    BrotherJames
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    If in another instance a verse speaks of the atonement for "all", the "all" is modified by the fact - the elect.

    Thats confusing. Is God confusing?
     
  6. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    EVERY time the word "all" is used, it must be modified and narrowed. This is not confusing; it is simple grammar. Immediately say "is this everyone who has ever lived, without exception?" In 99.9% of the cases, no.

    There went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that ALL the world should be taxed.

    How would you modify "all"? Everyone without exception? Nada.
     
  7. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, much like "for ALL have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God". All in modified to mean only a certain portion at 'all' times :laugh:

    All can mean all of a thing or all of a portion regard that thing. Depending on its usage. Be VERY careful not to allow your theology to interpret scripture but allow scripture to interpret your theology.


    Much like Christ being the propitiation or substitute for our sins.
    What does John mean when HE states the phrase 'whole world'.
    Well let us look at every time HE uses it so we can see just how he uses it.

    So in the SAME letter he states Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world and then just a little later shows us the defintion of that phrase he is using.
    The whole world lies in wickedness / sin. But just for good measure let us see the other two times it is used.

    Here we see that Satan is the deciever of the whole world and since the whole world lies in wickedness this remains consistant with Johns usage of whole world.

    Here the whole world is going up against God to do battle. So what you have in each instance is not a reference to every person but every sinner. The phrase 'whole world' excludes believers from it. Specifically with regard to Johns writtings but also the other Apostles and Christ Jesus as well in which they state or write - do not be of the world - the world hates you - you are not of the world - a friend of the world is an enemy of God - et..et...

    So what does whole world mean? The elect??
    Was Christ the propitiation for our sins but NOT OURS ONLY but the sins of the whole world (all saints [not ours only] + all sinners [whole world]) or does whole world mean all the Elect only?

    Did Christ die for the Elect? Yes.
    But was it for the elect only? Not if one chooses to believe the whole of scripture.


    Also - Christ had to follow the Law with regard to the atonement sacrifice. Therefore, just as the sacrifice of Atonement HAD to be made on behalf of ALL (everyone) of Israel, so Christ had to die for All as well. Was all atoned for? No because the sacrifice of atonement was only applied through faith JUST as our propitiation (substitute/sacrifice) is received BY Faith.
    I encourage you to look it up and find out for yourself.


    I believe what the Calvinist and the Non-Cal dispute over is the mechanics of the same immutable truths we BOTH believe.
     
    #7 Allan, Dec 11, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2007
  8. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    The danger is that, believing something we can't see or know in place of Someone we can know means 1) we may have faith in something that doesn't exist and 2) we may miss the true faith that we are supposed to have.

    Here's how that works: No one is saying that anyone here doesn't believe in Christ or the resurrection, etc. But there is a huge difference between that and believing I must do something specific with that belief else I won't be "born again."

    Suppose I told you that I bought you a Christmas present and I told you, "Hey, Joe. Remind me when Christmas day. I'll give it to you then."

    But come Christmas, I don't give it to you and feel awkward asking for it. So you sit around many days just waiting and then it is New Year.

    First of all, what did I ask you to do in order to receive your gift? Just ask me, right? God has a gift already paid for for everyone and anyone who will ask believing. The problem isn't the present or the giver --- it is the one who won't receive.

    Now Calvies have a rebuttal to that. They say that they repent and receive faith after they are regenerated -- after they have the "gift" of the rebirth. Dude! How'd you get the gift before you asked? The Bible says "Repent and be baptized EVERYONE in the name of Christ for the remission of sin and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

    You got it all turned around (or maybe haven't got it at all) if you say "I got the "gift" and then repented (asked for the gift)."


    The tawdry little secret behind this, though, is that most Calvies did ask and receive but now claim it was the other way around -- receive, then ask. And what about those for whom this presents an "awkward dilemma? Who say, "I simply deomonstrate my lack of faith if I ask for something I already have. That'd be like pretending that my wife didn't give me that great snowblower for Christmas last year and I ask her for one this year."

    I don't know if I make myself clear but it is pure speculation that God chose Calvies to salvation in eternity past. When He foresaw that they would believe, He DID predestine their lives in accordance with their spiritual growth (Once we trust Him, there are all kinds of things He can do through us that He doesn't do through the lost!).

    skypair
     
  9. christianyouth

    christianyouth
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    1
    Good point. :)

    But the context of Romans 1-2 shows what the "ALL" is. In Romans 1 Paul proves that Gentiles are guilty before God, saying that they supress the truth of God revealed in nature and break His law that is written upon their hearts. In Romans 2 he shows that the Jews who were entrusted with God's law also break the law and are condemned. In Romans 3 he concludes by saying that both Jews and Gentiles are sinners, so we know what all means. It means all Jews and all Gentiles(every person who ever existed).

    EDIT : Just wanted to add, Allen, that some Calvinists are guilty of reading the Bible in an unnatural way to keep their views. James White is known for redescribing John 3:16 to say, "All those believing have eternal life" instead of 'whosoever believes has eternal life'. I'm glad you and webdog, and others i'm sure, see this. TCGreek said before, that we are going to have tensions in scripture and things that we do not fully comprehend. For me, the atonement passages are like this. I have a hard time with both views just based on a reading of the verses. If the free will view is true, you have Christ not actually purchasing someones salvation and propitiating for their sin, but merely making their salvation possible. If the Calvinist view is true, you have Jesus just dying for a specific group of people even when the Bible seems to make it clear that Christ died for all. It's confusing to me.

    However, I'm gonna say this and hopefully this won't make you think I'm biased. I think there is a lot of evidence that Christ's atonement actually removed our sin. If this is true, then limited atonement or universalism is the only option. I don't have the verses right off hand, but I'm sure some of my more knowledgeable Calvinistic brothers could post them.

    I don't want to pretend like there is no mystery here.
     
    #9 christianyouth, Dec 11, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2007
  10. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you...
    You have cleared up a question my dad and I have been debating for yrs...

    Why didn't I see it before?!!!
     
  11. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Have ALL sinned and fallen short of God's glory?

    Or do you immediately MODIFY "all"? You do . .

    ALL in that verse does not include angels. Only some of them sinned. So you narrowed "all" down to the human race among the spiritual beings that could sin.

    ALL in that verse does not include Jesus. He "knew no sin", so you narrowed "all" down to exclude the Son of man.

    See what I'm getting at? "ALL" is always modified in context. We do it automatically in our minds.
     
  12. KSeeker

    KSeeker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    So what do you do with 1 Tim 4 :10? "For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, especially of those that believe."
     
  13. christianyouth

    christianyouth
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, it seems like you either have to say everyone is going to heaven or that word 'all' does not denote 'every single person who has ever existed.
     
  14. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think you are confusing what an atonement is. An atonement is legal payment...it is not forgiveness, nor is it the granting of salvation. That comes by faith alone.

    tonement
    ATO'NEMENT
    , n.
    1. Agreement; concord; reconciliation, after enmity or controversy. Rom 5.
    Between the Duke of Glo'ster and your brothers.
    2. Expiation; satisfaction or reparation made by giving an equivalent for an injury, or by doing or suffering that which is received in satisfaction for an offense or injury; with for.
    And Moses said to Aaron, go to the altar, and offer thy sin-offering, and thy burnt-offering, and make an atonement for thyself and for the people. Lev 9.
    When a man has been guilty of any vice, the best atonement he can make for it is, to warn others not to fall into the like.
    The Phocians behaved with so much gallantry, that they were thought to have made a sufficient atonement for their former offense.
    3. In theology, the expiation of sin made by the obedience and personal sufferings of Christ.
     
  15. KSeeker

    KSeeker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    1 Tim 4:10 seems to clearly state that Jesus Christ is the Savior of ALL men. From the use of the word ESPECIALLY in this verse, there is evidently something special about those who choose to believe in Christ.
    I do not believe that the word ALL here is meant to be modified to mean anything else other that ALL (the whole quantity or amount, the whole number; every one, everything )
     
  16. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Things Hard to be Understood
    1Ti. 4:10
    “For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.” – 1Ti 4:10

    This verse refutes the doctrine of sovereign election to damnation as well as the doctrine of universalism. God is the Savior of all men in the sense that He loves all men and has provided for the salvation of all men and desires to save all men (1Ti 2:6; Heb 2:9; 2Pe 2:1; 1Jo 2:2). He is also the Savior of all men in the sense that He cares for both lost and saved in a temporal sense (Mt 5:45). God is the Savior “specially of those that believe,” meaning He is the Savior of the believer in a special sense that He is not the Savior of the unbeliever. To the unbeliever, He is a loving God and Creator. To the believer, He is Father and Redeemer.
     
  17. KSeeker

    KSeeker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    1 Tim 2: 3-4 "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
    1Tim 2:6 "who gave Himself a ransom FOR ALL, to be testified in due time.."
    Hebrews 2:9 "...should taste death FOR EVERY MAN..."
    2 Peter 2:1 "even denying the Lord that BOUGHT them..."
    1 John 2:2 "He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.."

    To say that "God is the Savior of all men in the sense that He loves all men and has provided for the salvation of all men and desires to save all men " is taking away from the power of Almighty God. In the verses that you have listed, God wills that every man be saved. Why would one limit God's power in saying that He really can't, at some point in time, save all men. Wasn't Christ's sacrifice for all sin? So isn't every man's sin debt paid for?
     
  18. KSeeker

    KSeeker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    No response? I'm just thinking out loud.:wavey:
     
  19. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    If a simple reading of a text (that a child can understand) tells us that God is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believes, the atonement was for all, but salvation is only for those who believe.
     
    #19 webdog, Dec 12, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 12, 2007
  20. KSeeker

    KSeeker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't see that...the simple reading of the text tells me that GOD IS THE SAVIOR OF ALL MEN. There's no condition placed on that statement. GOD IS THE SAVIOR OF ALL MEN...Let's dissect this verse:
    1. God is the Savior of all men- All men; not just all those who believe.
    2. ESPECIALLY of those who believe-this does not say that God is the Savior of all men, ONLY of those who believe. It says ESPECIALLY of those who believe. So I see that we as Christians, who believe on the name of Jesus Christ, His death and shed blood, have some priority over those who will never come to a saving knowledge of Christ.

    I don't understand the depth of this, but it seems too clear for me to reject.
     

Share This Page

Loading...