Featured Theology - Study of God

Why do you think the Church was the specific locus of Luke and Paul in those references I quoted? Why would anyone extrapolate that Luke and Paul really meant to be all-inclusive despite the stumbling block of "the Church" in those passages? Does it make any sense to reason that :"Well, the Church is mentioned, but it really doesn't mean that it is the only recipient of the Lord's death. He died for His Bride, but He also died for everyone else too."

No Van. That doesn't compute. Christ laid down His life for His sheep only. The sheep of course are the same individuals as the Church,the Bride,the Body, His people, the elect,the called, predestined, justified and the glorified.

 

Calvinism was the theological system that became formally encoded after John Calvin himself presented his systematic theology, but the concepts that he got that from were already held to in the church before Him, as that is the best way to see the theology of jesus and the Apostles!

 

Of course it is of use in discussing it. The subject is very important.

Of course I don't believe my so-called Calvinistic views have been added to Scripture. You are putting the cart before the horse. Calvinism is already present in the Word of God. And of course that means that it was there long before John Calvin!

You have presented no evidence. I have been producing scriptural proof that Christ died for His elect alone.

The above is mere balderdash.

Christ died for His redeemed. The ransomed of the Lord are the only ones who are recipients of His salvific mercy. No one will lay any charge against the Lord's elect. He died and interceding for us -- no one else. Christ laid down His life for His sheep --not the goats. Sheep can not be turned into goats and goats can't be become sheep. Christ knows only His own --that personal,deep intimacy.

The names of the elect are written in the Lamb's Book of life. They were put there before the foundation of the world. The elect --God's chosen people are the sole beneficiaries of His death. The elect of God are from among every nation,tribe,people and language.

The above is written in capsule form for your convenience. And if you knew the scriptures from which they are based you would not deny that the doctrine is entirely biblical.

 

ALL theology proper is derived from the Bible itself, so the concepts and doctrines were not invented by a calvin or luther or whoever, but was redisovered by them!

 

good alalysis!

main point is that neither calvinism/Arminianism, or any other theology that is within orthodoxy is claiming that it comes from new received revelations, but are all found within the scriptures themselves...

Roman catholic ans charasmatic theologies however do claim additional/ongoing revelations to make their cases!

 

Calvinism does, in the doctrine of Sotierology proper, as we must see salvation thru the Fall of Adam and redemption thru second adam jesus!

 

Talking about yourself I see.

You're calling us all liars then?

Hmm...
What about Is. 53:12 : "For he bore the sin of many,and made intercession for the transgressors."

What about Matt. 26:28 : "This is the blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

What about Mark 10:45 : "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

What about Heb. 9:28 : "So Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many..."

Hmm...?

Of course He laid down His life as a will sacrifice for all kinds of people? You doubt that? He died for the rich,poor and in between, male and female,ugly and good-looking,educated and illiterate etc, etc.

You want to deny the obvious?

You do realize that propitiation removes God's actual anger against sinners, do you not? If he doesn't punish anyone for their sin then all are saved -- i.e. universalism. Do you really want to go that route?

What,pray tell, is the difference?

 

Praise God!

I want to say more about 1 John 2:2.

It's directly linked with John 11:51,52. The same author is writing on the same theme.

I will quote the latter. :

"He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one."

Christ's atoning sacrifice was international in scope. See Rev. 5:9 :

"You were slain, and with your blood you purchased for God persons from every tribe and language and people and nation."

See Rev. 7:9 :

"After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb."

Christ died for everyone without distinction, not everyone without exception.

 

Please rephrase that "sentence" please. I have no idea what you meant.

No, only in Vanology. Christ died for all sorts of people means all categories --all kinds of folks. Simple and straightforward really.

You need an editor Van. Your lack of plain-speak is not helping you.

Since you insist that the word Church is superfluous in those passages I quoted why not come out with a Van-translation where such problematic words are deleted and you can insert your own theology in the text? For instance, you can redo Ephesians 5:25 to read :"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved each and every member of the human race, of which he is the Savior."

 

The Author of Hebrews stated that Christ died in order to provide salvation for the many, not all, and that he was the high priest appointed unto them who would inherit salvation, so was he wrong?

 

No, but your interpretation is. The word translated "many" is the Greek polus and does mean "all." The reason it is translated "many" In Hebrews 2:10 and in 9:28 is not because He has chosen against some for salvation, but because not all will be saved. That is a finite but significant distinction. It has nothing to do with God's choice for some and against others. It has everything to do with man's will to reject God.

 

The m as the messiah/High priest was towards the many who received Him and were saved, so his death/resurrection covered just those peoples, not ALL others. correct?

 

Incorrect. Jesus' death was sufficient for "all" the world. But not "all" the world will believe on Him for salvation. Atonement is not limited by God, but by those who rebel against Him.

 

God Himself was the One to limit how many were to be saved by the death of jesus, as he atoned for a specific group of sinners, those whom his death wewre intended to be covered by!

 

Could also state though that those who try to get human free will and response into being equal to the Will of God to save us, that is also "adding to the scriptures!"