"deny the Master who bought them."

I don't see your point. You certainly don't think that each and every member of the human race has been or shall be justified --do you? But indeed,all who are justified have been made so through the agency of the grace which has come through the redemption of Christ Jesus.

 

Laugh away. You don't have an effective counter --that's apparent.

You don't believe in context.

That is a very juvenile way of defending your views and opposing the views of another. Can't you do better than that?

 

Good thing you guys didn't run into Robert Tilton first instead of Sproul and MacArthur, or you would be sending $500 for a prayer cloth.

[snipped - inflammatory]

 

This--the Old Testament reference--is not entirely true.

Certainly there was a Day of Atonement. But, your statement makes it seem like that was the only thing going on. In fact, when an Israelite sinned, they were required to make sacrifice for that sin--and not just on the Day of Atonement.

The corporate nature of the Day of Atonement was for many things, including a purification of the land itself (hence Jesus' death being necessary for the lifting of the curse from the earth...).

The Archangel

 

This is why the Lutherans liked the new NIV so much, from your thread 2011 NIV Is Praised — Some Lutherans like the 2011 NIV and so should you!:

 

Aside from the Scripture itself --the expositions of Dr.David M-L-Jones in Romans and Ephesians starting around 1980 or so was my first introduction to the Doctrine(s))of Grace and generally opened up the whole Word of God in a way like never before.

 

I just wasted 31 minutes listening to this pseudo-teacher.

First after 15 minutes of mindless introduction talking about lights and batteries, he finally got to the meat of his false teaching:

Master doesn't actually mean Master, and bought doesn't actually mean bought.

And in his grand conclusion he said: " Justice will be done." How profound. I guess it takes a doctorate to understand this complex sentence!

According to this boring, misguided soul, the bible only means what the Calvinists say it means. It is not to be taken at face value.

I thank God it was several years after coming to the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation before I even heard of Calvinism. Otherwise I might be as mixed up as teachers like this are.

 

Who in the world are you talking about Robert? Please clue us in.

 

2 Timothy 2:10
Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory.

2 Peter 1:10
10 Therefore, my brothers and sisters,[The Greek word for brothers and sisters (adelphoi) refers here to believers, both men and women, as part of God’s family.] make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble, 11 and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 9:27
24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win. 25 Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. 26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim;but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

2 Timothy 4:7
I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.

James 5:
17 Elijah was a human being, even as we are. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years. 18 Again he prayed, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth produced its crops.

19 My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, 20 remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.

1 Timothy 4:16
Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers.

James 2:14
[ Faith and Deeds ] What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them?

Hebrews 3:
12 See to it, brothers and sisters, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. 13 But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called “Today,” so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. 14 We have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original conviction firmly to the very end.

 

I don't understand what you don't understand.

This worthless video was nothing but a waste of time. It was a so-called teacher attempting to explain away the plain teachings of the bible.

 

LOL!

The question is :You are you speaking of? Did someone post a link in this thread a while back --that you're talking about?

I can't even watch videos here in the Mainland.

 

Yes, you haven't even looked at the video?

 

This 2 year old thread has been brought up and de-railed. I want to try to ask a question that is somewhat back on topic of Dr. White's lecture. His point was that Peter was thinking/speaking similarly to Deut. 32 where God has bought all men through creation. So this is a different understanding of bought that does not have to do with purchasing with the blood of Christ. Just because it isn't the plain reading of the American mind does not mean it is an incorrect interpretation. Now, I have never thought of this passage in this sense and to be honest it is a difficult passage to deal with as a Calvinist. My goal isn't naturally to read my views upon the text as we all do at times, but rather to let the text speak. What makes it difficult is that Scripture doesn't contradict therefore if this passage speaks of unlimited atonement and others limited then which am I getting wrong? (rhetorical)

So While I cannot confidently take White's view I think it is very likely although I am not sure if we can push the Greek terminology to only speaking of the Father. I simply havent looked into this.

So without arguing the plain meaning why is Mr. White wrong for assuming bought here (taken from Deut 32) is in reference to God's ownership over all His created beings including heretics?

Can we logically refute this by saying Mr. White is trying to hard, or is his view possible at the least?

 

Hi Rippon, I try not to mock, ridicule or be obnoxious to my brethren for their various views.

So, no, it didn't even enter my mind concerning your thoughts (in particular) concerning Acts 17:30.

In full disclosure I am yet undecided concerning C vs. A.

When I post a challenge I am looking for a scriptural explanation which you gave but to which I don't subscribe,
IMO, world-comos means world as in the following verse:

1 John 5:19 And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.​

Therefore God's propitiation is to and for that very world which "lieth in wickedness" on an individual level:

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.​

John 3
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.​

In my view propitiation for all must precede justification for the "whosoevers".​

Over all, I believe there is a more accurate view than the present C vs A war, I just haven't found it yet.

However the relational basis of salvation does seems a meeting of the minds rather than an "unconditional election":

Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.​

HankD

 

Yes, I watched this video by James White when this thread first came out. It's pathetic. As you say, he is simply trying to explain away scripture that a third-grader could easily understand. This is why I have no respect for Calvinist so-called "scholars".

There is a time to mock, Calvinists constantly insult our intelligence with their twisting and redefining easily understood words. They deserve mockery.

The sad part is not that they try to deceive others, only the simple are fooled, but that they themselves allow themselves to be deceived by such dishonest arguments.

But... you can't shame them, so obviously they DESIRE to be deceived.

I would trust a crooked used car salesman before I would listen to James White and many other Reformed "scholars", if that's what you want to call them. I would call them false teachers that the scriptures warn about.

And I'm being nice, you don't want to know what I REALLY think about these guys.

 

heard that he was a great expositer of the Bible, able to make hard concepts easily understandable...

Pity that Bishop paulk took his framework of seeing the Bible, and ran Kingdom Now theology from it, he always said that Dr Jones"understood the Kingdom, but now the power of it", so here came pentacostal power in Kingdom Now !

 

I agree with John Calvin when he wrote:

And when he says, the sin OF THE WORLD, He extends this favour indiscriminately to the whole human race; that the Jews might not think that He had been sent to them alone. But hence we infer that the whole world is involved in the same condemnation; and that as all men without exception are guilty of unrighteousness before God, they need to be reconciled to Him. John the Baptist, therefore, by speaking generally of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek the remedy. Now our duty is to embrace the benefit which is offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, provided that he comes to Him by the guidance of faith.

"As no man is excluded from calling upon God, the gate of salvation is set open to all men; neither is there any other thing which keepeth us back from entering in, save only our own unbelief." - John Calvin​

"What many five-point Calvinists demand from their four-point Calvinist and non-Calvinist brothers and sisters is answering how God could send unbelievers to hell if Christ’s atoning sacrifice was made for them. This question must recognize: 1) there is an assumption that Christ’s atonement is automatically applied to someone; and 2) there is an assumption that the application of Christ’s atonement is unconditional. These two presumptions need to be addressed.

Admittedly, the theory of limited atonement would never have been philosophically conceived were it not for another philosophical theory: unconditional election. What Calvinists want to know is this: if God has unconditionally elected to save only some, then to what benefit is the atonement for the non-elect? From such philosophical reasoning, limited atonement becomes, for some, a necessary doctrine, whether or not it has explicit scriptural warrant or support. It is, in my opinion, like other Calvinistic theories: a presupposition in search of biblical authority." (ref. William Birch)