Can Armenian Calvinists Co-Exist?

Rip: As a matter of fact, no. When you bring up 1 John 2:2, you need to cross-reference it with John 11:51,52:"He [Caiaphas -- Rip]did not say say this on his own, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus was about to die for the nation, and not for that nation only, but to gather into one the dispersed children of God."( NRSV)

Allen, I'm sure you know that the term 'whole world' by John has application to several different meanings. You have admitted that before. Perhaps you need some sleep. John does not 'constistantly':laugh: use the same meaning of the term throughout his writings.

 

IF that were all that made one Calvinistic then yes. But that is not all.
And actaully I lean more toward a Calvinistic bent

 

So you believe that Christ's death was for the whole nation (all the Jews)? Then you believe everyone who is Jewish is to be saved since He was to die for them all?? It does not say for some of those IN that nation and in other nations but specifically states FOR THE Nation, and not THAT Nation ONLY..

Remember the sacrifice was for ALL of Israel but not ALL of Israel was saved because of the sacrifice. It could only be applied to the people by or through faith.

You have to do A LOT of twisting the scriptures to make it say some of those in the nations when it specifcially says He was to die for that nation and not for that nation only. A nation is an all inclusive term regarding all of a certain people.

Actually it doesn't but to be on the safe side let's look at how John uses the phrase "whole world" shall we
Here is every time the phrase is used by John:

Seems pretty consistant.
Whole world = the wicked and decieved (unregenerate) - and NOT all mankind - but ALL unregenerate
And if you like I will even say there can be one other definition seen - Whole World = All people non-Jewish ('all' here being inclusive every non-Jew just as "our" is inclusive of every Jew)

 

Scripture From The NRSV

 

This thread isn't about salvation or Rom 9 or any of the rest of the stuff you keep on about.. however suffice to say Rom 9 is about the Nation of Israel (vs 23 - His people ) and the Gentile Nations (vs 22 - those not His people).

Regarding the thread - (or back to it) There are some who can not be unified with those who are different on some theological points and there are those who can and will continue to do the Lords work side-by-side

Where do you find that Christ "refused" to pray for someone or a group.

this does not state Christ refused to pray for them. Try again.

 

I'm out of the back and forth on this one Rippon because we are going way off topic here, so how about we get back to the OP.

The fact is there are those (cal's and non-cals) who will work together for the glory of the Lord and those who refuse to.

 

Again WRONG! Please quote where I have said "that people on both sides have problems reconciling the responsibility of man with God's foreordination. " No where. I have spoken of the tensions in scripture and shown where Calvinist DO say so.

See, I told you that you don't have a clue most specifically as to what I believe. No I nor most of the Non-Cals I know hold to such. There are those who do but there are those who don't hold to the 'forsight' argument.

Now can we get back to the OP>>>>

 

I repeat: Why does Christ refer to Himself as the Great Shepherd? If folks like Allan think that Christ died for the goats too, then there is no particular reason for Christ to be known as the Shepherd of the sheep. Scripture makes it abundantly clear that Christ specifically died for His sheep. Christ never said He died for the goats. Christ never said that goats turn into sheep. Christ is not a goat-herder!

The Lord has sovereign discrimination. He places the Church in counter-distinction to the world. He places the elect against the condemned. He puts the sheep up against the goats. Allan is doing some unwarranted mixing where the Bible shows definitive lines of separation.

Christians need to distinguish between things that differ. Scripture tells us very plainly what they are.