Featured The Children whom God hath given me

You might suspect me for many things, but interpreting the Bible literally, as it should be, I will definitely admit to. Those who continue to consider it as one large allegorical stand on the shoulders of one who who even the RCC deemed as a heretic. Before Origen the allegorical method of interpretation was not used, not even known.

All things are clearly described in Scripture. Therefore we ought to study them to show ourselves approved unto God, rightly dividing the word of truth, not spiritualizing it.

You simply avoided my question. You don't want to answer it.
The question was:
Why did God give Moses the Law, and for whom did he give it to?
You didn't answer that question clearly. Why not?
Now, can you give a clear concise answer?

You avoid the question because it proves you wrong and cannot answer.
It demonstrates that all scripture is not written for all Christians. Some scripture is written specifically for the Jews. This you will not admit. Instead you just throw disparaging remarks like the above. It is a pity, really.

Than answer speaks of the heresy of Replacement Theology which apparently you believe.
The Church does not replace The Temple.
Consider 1Cor.6:19,20. The NT temple is the believer himself.
God does not dwell in buildings made by hands. You do know that, don't you?

Do you know what a dispensation is? Do you realize you cannot read the Bible without realizing there are dispensations and even Paul states that there are dispensations, along with the writer of Hebrews (1:1,2).

It must be nice to have that attitude:
"I am right and the rest of evangelical Christianity and scholarship is wrong."

So, by what you wrote here, you consider all dispensationalists unsaved. That is quite a statement and a very sad one indeed. Dispensationalists, in your opinion, need to be deprogrammed. I think most of the administration hold to dispensational views. Do you have a particular mission on this board?
We would like to hear about it?

 

Folks, limited atonement is unbiblical and has no support in scripture. Christ died for the many, meaning everyone but Christ, and Christ died for all, meaning all mankind. Christ became the propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world, meaning all mankind.

Hebrews 2:9 But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

Yes Christ died for the church, but the church is part of all mankind, so Christ died both for the church and all mankind. Any other view must nullify verse after verse, such as John 3:16, 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:6 and Hebrews 2:9.

 

No they don't. That is one of the characteristics of those who hold to an Amil view. In order to hold to their position they must interpret the scripture in an allegorical view. For example it becomes impossible in Rev.20:1-6 for them to interpret the word "thousand" literally even though it is mentioned at least five times in a literal sense. In some nonsensical way they feel the need to spiritualize it because their Amil position requires them to do so.

Really? I just gave you a very good example on why the Bible "should be" interpreted in a literal fashion, and why the Amil cannot interpret it literally. It goes directly against the grain of his preconceived theology.

Saying that Israel is simply a shadow of the church is allegory.
Israel is no shadow. Paul did not pray for the salvation of shadow. He was no lunatic as you seem to depict him. Paul taught through various scriptures that Israel, as a nation, existed during his time. And if it existed in his time, that is after Pentecost, it still exists now.

It is not I that inserts "ideas" into scripture. It is you (the Amil) that does so.
I don't do away with the literal translation of the word "thousand" and then spiritualize the passage.
I don't demean Israel down to simply "a shadow."
I believe the Scripture and the promises which describe a literal kingdom on earth yet to come; you do not. You simply spiritualize those promises away.
Will the child play with the snake; the lion and the lamb lie down together?
Will Christ rule from the throne of David?
--I believe these promises; apparently you do not. It is all allegory!!

You side-stepped it, as you are trying to do again:
Why did God give Moses the Law, and for whom did he give it to?
--No direct answer was given.

Because it is not true. If it was true then it was a waste of time on Moses part and on God's part for Moses to go up into the Mount and receive the Law from the hand of God--a complete waste of time.
According to you they already had the law--why were they wasting their time??!!
But you are not speaking the truth; only making excuses.

The law came through Moses. Moses is known as the "law giver."

John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

When Moses delivered the Israelites out of Egypt he led them to Mt. Sinai. It was there that God gave them the Law. It was there that the Lord became their God--the Lord God Jehovah. Under that Law, that Covenant, Israel officially became a theocracy under God. The formerly migrating tribes of Jacob were now a nation under God.

Of course all scripture is profitable for us. I never denied that fact.
However, not all Scripture is directly applicable to us, and written primarily to us and for us. You have a hard time admitting this.
Even the Law:
John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Do you actually "need" all 66 books of the Scripture. There are many nations in this world that only have the NT or even less than that translated into their language. Do you think that you would not be saved if you didn't have the OT? Early believers didn't have the NT.
Philip led the Ethiopian Eunuch to the Lord using primarily the Book of Isaiah. He had no NT scriptures.
The Bereans checked out Paul's preaching by studying it and comparing it to the OT scriptures. They also didn't have the NT scriptures.
I know of a believer in a concentration camp in Russia some time ago that had only the Book of Psalms to feed on. He survived without losing his faith.
Consider yourself fortunate to have an entire Bible, and probably more than one.

 

I am not sure what you are referring to. Scripture has one interpretation but many applications. One cannot apply the Scripture to themselves when it is meant for another. There are specific promises made to Abraham that I cannot claim as my own, for example.

I demonstrated how great portions of Scripture could not possibly apply to you. Instead you just demean them and throw disparaging remarks. You admit to nothing of any honest value. You talk of Christian ethic. If you had answered the post in the first place then you wouldn't be in such an embarrassing position.
Just to remind you and the reader, Were the instructions in the Book of Exodus to build the tabernacle given to the Jews only, or are they given to you as well? If so, have you obeyed God and built one??

Suggesting that the Church replaces the Temple does suggest a belief in replacement theology. My statement was not out of order. You can clarify your belief as you wish.

Quote the verse; give the context; and then describe what the author is speaking about. Otherwise your statement is meaningless.

The "ye" in 1Cor.3 refers to the believers at the church in Corinth and to their church. It does not refer to all believers everywhere or any such mythical universal church. He was addressing the church at Corinth.

1 Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
He is picking up where he left off in verse 9:
1 Corinthians 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.
--Where the believers met, that is where God was. God dwelt among them.

This I-know-it-all attitude of yours shows up in this post very clearly:

I don't have time to answer the rest of this post. I have to go.
But to say this much, when one talks of having to deprogram someone it is normally used in the context of cults. In fact that is the only context I have ever heard the word used. A person involved in a cult needs to be "deprogrammed" before he can be saved.
Thus the conclusion:
All here who believe in dispensationalism are not saved. We need to be deprogrammed first, and then we can be saved. That is pretty much what you either said or inferred. It is quite insulting Icon.

 

Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”[Jn 6:29] Then there is for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.[Phpp 2:13] And also It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.[Rom. 9:16] In the calling of sinners it works from the inside out. God wroughts a work inside that only He can do. Man can not stop the 'birth from above' no more than they could stop their naturally being born. That is why it is of the utmost importance to understand that regeneration leads to salvation and is not salvation. We are elected unto salvation from the foundation of the world[Eph. 1:4], but salvation happens in time. We were As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath.[Eph. 2:1-3] But now we are But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.[Eph. 2:4-7] And then finally For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.[Eph. 2:8-10] The works we do through Christ were prepared in advance for us.

You are the one who is using the word 'force' and not I. God calls sinners from within and not without. Sure, we all resisted the Holy Spirit in our lives, and I am not denying I did, too. Yet there was a time when He came to me so hard I could not turn Him away. He changed me on the inside and then the outside followed suit. As Jesus stated Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.[Mat. 23:25,26] The inside has to first be cleansed before the outside will also be cleansed. Jesus also said Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.[Mat. 23:27,28] Unless God first wroughts the works inside, the outside can do nothing.

Fallen man has no desire to believe. The, For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even their name is forgotten.[Ecc. 9:5] Unless God first works inside, the outside and inside are both in the same boat, dead in their sins.

Why did He choose us in Christ before the foundation of the world? he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ. In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.[Eph. 1:9-14] Everything God does is according to His good will and pleasure and also to the praise of His glory. That is why He does anything, to His praise of glory and according to His good will and pleasure.

God foreknew us because He fore-ordained, fore-appointed us to the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.”[Rom. 8:15]

Agreed.

And you have just ushered in a conundrum within your own view(s). You do not believe in a limited atonement, yet said that Christ did not die for the sin of unbelief? Is that true? If so, then you just limited the efficacious works of the cross.

 

Yet you state that Christ did not die for the sin of unbelief, correct? If I misunderstood you, please accept my apology.


But if what I stated about your view here is correct, you, by mere implication, just limited the atonement yourself.

 

Unbelief was not and couldn't be paid, why because it takes one to believe in order to repent from it. Christ could not pay for unbelief because it is the volition of man, man must choose to accept or reject Christ.

I have seen many under the conviction of the Holy Spirit. Many tearfully under conviction but refusing to acknowledge Christ. I have seen my Dad telling my Uncles about Christ and seeing them under conviction saying they were baptized as infants into the RCC and refusing to give up their religion even though they were under great conviction of the Holy Spirit.

Many are called by the Holy Spirit and refuse to react positively to that call, they resist the calling and die in unbelief. They die and are condemned because they refuse to believe on the only begotten Son of God who has paid for their sins.

Maybe it should not be called a sin just simply unbelief they die in unbelief and Christ is the propitiation for Sin the sin of all human beings. There are many who refuse to believe and because of that unbelief they are condemned already.

So is unbelief a sin or is it simply unbelief, the thing is it is what condemns someone to the second death not sin.

 

And yet, you have, by mere implication, limited the atonement.

 

Christ died for the church, but the church is part of all mankind, so Christ died both for the church and all mankind. Any other view must nullify verse after verse, such as John 3:16, 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:6 and Hebrews 2:9.

Everyone believing...propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world...laid down His life as a ransom for all...tasted death for everyone...!

And do not buy the smoke screen of those who obfuscate by claiming "limited atonement" refers to not everyone receives the reconciliation provided by the cross. The actual idea is Christ did not die for everyone, and that view is mistaken and unbiblical.

 

All sin was atoned for unbelief is not a sin and I let my analytical brain get in the way of the fact that unbelief causes one to spend eternity in Hell and say the sin of unbelief instead of just unbelief.

[Now some will always say well you said it and you believe it but folks always say things in the process of speaking that comes out a different way than they intended. that happened in this case. Unbelief is what send s one to hell not sin Christ atoned for sin He became the propitiatory sacrifice for sin]

All sin was paid by Christ, but unbelief that not believing on Christ condemns.

John 3:18 makes that clear.

Notice Jesus didn't say that they are condemned already because of the sin they have committed. His words are "he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

Antonement for sin took place upon the Cross and 1 John 2:2 says "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for (the sins of) the whole world." The italicized portion is said to be added.
The verse then would [not for ours only that is not for the believers sin only but He is the propitiation for the whole world that is all of mankind].

Christ death on the cross paid in full the requirement for sin. One must accept that payment by as Christ said in John 3:18, believing "in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

Many will say well I belive Jesus existed but what Jesus is saying is that you have full and complete belief in everything He did in His efficacious work on the cross. He effectively died for the sins of the world that is all mankind.

John the baptist made it clear too when He proclaimed Jesus as the Messiah and Savior.

He was the one who would be the Propitiation for the sins of the world He would take away the issue of sin and make it an issue of the Son and belief on Him brings salvation rejection or unbelief condemns a soul to the 2nd death that is eternal separation from God.

 

Pardon me? But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.[Rom. 14:23]

The polar opposite of faith is unbelief, and unbelief is sin.

If unbelief is not a sin, then how does it condemn?

Condemnation is upon all unbelievers because they have zero faith.

Again, if unbelief is not a sin, then how are they condemned to the second death?

You have me utterly confused here. Please clarify. Thanks.

 

Yes, God loves the world but also The arrogant cannot stand in your presence.You hate all who do wrong;[Ps 5:5] You have to properly exegete each and every passage or you pit scripture against scripture.

Propitiation does not mean means of salvation. It means satisifaction. It satisified God's wrath.

There is no smoke screen, as you eloquently put it. Christ's death brought reconciliation. If He died for everyone, even those who never knew He existed, all would be saved.

 

Could Jesus pay for unbelief?

Can anyone pay for unbelief?

What is the definition for sin?

Sin is missing the mark, Christ became the propitiation for mankind 1 John 2:2. Jesus is the ultimate sacrifice for mankind. His blood paid the price for man's sin. His blood became the atoning sacrifice for sin.

Those facts are seen here in these scriptures but also seen is that Jesus said mankind that is all humanity is condemned because of unbelief, John 3:17-18. What breaks condemnation? Belief on the only begotten son of God. Belief that He paid in full man's sin debt. That He rose again to prove all who believe will live forever with God.

Revelation 20 states all who are cast into the Lake of fire are there because of not having their names written in the book of Life.

How does one get their name written in the book of Life?

Is it by works?

Is it by how few sins you commit?

Is it because you believed on the only Begotten Son of God?

What sends those folks to the Lake of fire?

It is not by works of righteousness that we have done. It is not by how few sins we commit! The reason you have your name in the book of Life is because of God's Grace and how does His Grace become effective, by Faith that is Believing on the only begotten son. So those whose name are not found written in the book of life are their because of unbelief. whether we call it a sin or just unbelief it and it alone is the reason they are cast into the Lake of fire and die the 2nd Death.

Can a payment be made by anyone for someone's unbelief?

All that being said how do we define limited and unlimited?

Limited would be to just for certain people.

Unlimited would be for all.

Christ became the propitiation for all, that is God was satisfied with the payment made.

Christ payment of sin was for everyone yet not everyone is willing to allow the payment to be effective for their life they refuse to accept the gift and therefore that is what is called unbelief.

Is refusal of a gift sin?

Because that is what unbelief is a refusal to accept the price paid (gift) for your sin. The price was paid but was paid but refused by the one who was to receive the gift, is the gift theirs, yes, is it effective for them, no.
Is Atonement unlimited, yes! Do all receive the benefits of Christ atoning price, no. Many refuse it and depend upon themselves or religion or wworks but they refuse to receive Jesus as their savior and refuse to believe on the only Begotten Son of God and that is why they are condemned.

 

That is right and so to claim Christ did not die for everyone pits the claim against scripture.

Wrong, Propitiation = Christ = Means of salvation. 1 John 2:2. No one denies Christ is the propitiation for the whole world or that Christ is the means of salvation.

Wrong again. Scripture teaches a person must "receive" the reconciliation provided by the cross. Therefore to provide reconciliation for all mankind does not equate with saving all mankind. This spurious charge is obfuscation.

 

You are very wrong. That's not what propitiation is. I want you to cite a biblical commentary that says what you have posted endlessly.

Do you deny that Christ's death satisfied the wrath of the Father? Has the wrath of God the Father ceased against every single person --past, present and future?

I will deny your premise --that "world" means every single person head-for-head.Christ died not only for some among the Jews but also a number from among the Gentiles. He died for the children of God scattered throughout the world. It is these people --the elect that Christ died for. Christ became the substitute for their sin. He is the perfect Lamb of God who actually takes away sin and is propitiatory sacrifice.

That is not correct. His propitiatory sacrifice on the cross was the means whereby one is saved. But it is not accurate to say that Christ is the means of salvation.

 

The Greek for world as seen in 1 john 2:2 is "kosmou" the World.

Jesus said in John 15:19 "If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you."

Each place the word in the Greek is "kosmou".

Now in Matthew 12:32 we see And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

Here we have the word in the Greek for the red is "eon" which is age, and in the the blue "melloniti" the age to come. Different words for world in this case.

Matthew 13:38 we again see "kosmos" "The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;" The field is the Kosmos.

Thus 1 John 2:2 world is referring to all of mankind.

 

Hi Mr. Rippon. I want you to stop wasting my time. You have no idea what the word translated as propitiation means as determined by biblical usage.

Do you deny that Christ died for all mankind?

Did you not read Hebrews 2:9 where Christ tasted death for EVERYONE.

You have no idea what the word translated as world means when used by John as determined by study of all its usages.

And please explain how "means of salvation" differs from "means whereby one is saved."