Featured The Eternal Purpose of Christ PT 3

Unless you take a non-Cal stance and base things on the omniscience of God rather than God simply choosing some to eternal life and the rest to eternal damnation (as the confessions say) before the foundation of the world, then God is a cruel monster. Man did nothing wrong. He didn't sin. He did no wickedness--none of the things that you accuse him of. Before the world was created the Fall had not yet happened, but man is already condemned. That makes God the monster and the author of sin.

True, but it is the picture of God that the Calvinists paint--whatever God wants to do he can do: Create and destroy at random--Just like Jesus supposedly did. This is the exact picture given before the foundation of the world where Calvinists say: God elected some and reprobated others. (Jesus created some and destroyed others). Perhaps the author of the story was the "first Calvinist"

We didn't love ourselves before the foundation of the world, but God condemned most of the human race before the foundation of the world. On what basis?

Christ paid for all of our sin on the cross. He is the propitiation for our sins, not only for our sins but for the sins of the whole world.
On the basis of refusing or rejecting Christ will a person be condemned to Hell.
Yet your stand is that that decision is made for most people, if not all people, before the foundation of the world. That negates evangelism, the Great Commission, praying of the salvation for others, etc.
This is what it was like in William Carey's day.

John Collett Ryland is said to have challenge to missions: "Young man, sit down; when God pleases to convert the heathen, he will do it without your aid and mine." (Wikipedia)
--And that is the logical end of Calvinism. It certainly was in Carey's day.

God loved the elect enough to save them.
God hated the non-elect enough to damn them.
Therefore is he love or hate? He cannot be a schizophrenic. He is one or the other. What made God change?

Satan rebelled against God. God justly dealt with it. What is the problem there. You think God is the author of evil and pre-determined it all to happen? I don't.

This is a side-issue. God is a God of gentleness, longsuffering, kindness, etc. There are scores of attributes of God. Every time I am going to mention a Biblical truth are you going to throw a monkey wrench into the mix because one of God's attributes was not included. I think you can do better than that. It is a simple deflection from the truth of what has been said.

Paul simply said: "For by grace are ye saved through faith..."
Was he also wrong because he didn't mention mercy?

 

The Eternal Purpose of Christ PT 3 -----OP

It was determined from / before the foundation of the world that the Lamb without spot and without blemish would be slain. And the blood shed by being slain would be for redemption.

Are those two statements true or false?

Was the death absolutely necessary for the destruction of him that has the power of the death, that is the devil? Heb. 2:14

Was the Son of God manifested, as a man, subject to the death in order to destroy the works of the devil? Are those works inclusive of the death? Was the devil a sinner from the beginning, of something? 1 John 3:8

The only ones in the garden God planted Eastward in Eden and put the man, Adam were Adam, the woman taken from him, Eve and the devil who had the power of death. Why? Why? Why?

Adam became tempted when he was drawn away in his own lust, relative to the devil having deceived the woman, Eve and his lust conceived and brought forth sin, and sin brought the death of which the devil had the power thereof.

Is that true or false?

There was going to be redemption because God created Adam, flesh and blood, carnal, sold under sin, in order for the Son of God to be manifested to redeem back the man and destroy the devil and his works.

I wonder how much of the death God intends to redeem that was caused by the devil having the power of the death, over all the carnal men who have lived.

O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? Romans 7:24

I wonder what Calvin thought about all this? Or JA for that matter?
I think both of them were thinking about how man was going to save himself.

 

JA? Do you mean JO --John Owen?

 

You really need to clean up your act. Stop using such disgraceful language about God.

It is the very picture that Scripture paints --God does whatever He pleases anywhere in the universe He created with the people He made. If you reject that you have rejected Christ and the Word of God in the process.

Many have never heard of Christ or the gospel. They will be condemned for their sin.

 

Yes.....he has defiled himself once again with a disgraceful attack upon the biblical God.
BB rules forbid such an attack....but DHK ignores the rules to speak against God in an ungodly manner.....a real abomination.

 

DHK

Day after day we have the spectacle of DHK with his 24/7 anti cal agenda demonstrating that all such posts are void of any true biblical content in any positive way. The only "biblical content" is when a cal answers and refutes his false theories and carnal philosophy...we can illustrate it once again.

This means he intends to ignore God's decree

Does the biblical God...do anything "simply" as if by chance? You see a disturbed pattern of thought as if there is no acquaintance with the scriptural truth...but rather guesswork on the way.

 

Jacobus Arminius

 

I agree with you Rip and I had rather put my life, spirit, in the hands of God than in my own.

 

First, "my position" is not all over the place. So many points to address. I will start with one that I have addressed many times and you consistently fail to respond to and therefore consistently repeat.
1. All men have faith. True.
2. All faith has an object: money, parents, fame, etc.
3. Only faith in Christ and his atoning sacrifice can save.

Is that clear?

Now answer this question:
Matthew 8:10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
--Why did the Centurion have greater faith than anyone else in Israel, according to Jesus, and yet went away from Jesus not saved?

 

The one point that we are about to address which brings about false allegations demonstrates my point.

And yet it is still trust (i.e. faith).

Faith is faith. It is the object of faith that is different. Faith is confidence, trust.

Context is always a good thing. Yet all men still have faith. They might not have faith in the blood of Christ, but they still have faith.

I disagree, and I don't think you have any scriptural evidence to stand on.
Faith is not God given. Hundreds of examples can be given in the gospels and in the book of Acts. Hundreds more can be given out of the OT. None of them demonstrate that faith is a result of regeneration. Jesus Himself compared faith to that of little children, and surely they were not saved.
You have no evidence to stand on here.

But he was not saved!!!!
And that shoots down your whole argument above. You just finished explaining that faith comes from God, from the new birth, etc., etc.,
He was not born of God, not regenerated, not saved in any way. He was a Gentile Roman Centurion, an idolater. And yet he had more faith than all of Israel. How can that be true? He was an unbeliever, not saved.

 

He wasn't a godly man by simply reading the context. I can point to you many unsaved people that are religious but not saved; humble but not saved; etc. That is simply a works based salvation. He knew the same thing that scores of others knew--Jesus could heal. Everyone knew that. He healed right in the presence. How could one not know that?

You don't need to read any further than this to see the contradiction. MH says that he is a heathen and a godly man in the same sentence. How is that??

Simply because he asks to be healed doesn't make him saved or godly.

But he is wrong. There is nothing to connect this man to Cornelius. There are too many assumptions made here.
First note:
Acts 10:1 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
--Cornelius was from Caesarea, which is on the coast of the Mediterranean. If you could fly a plane from Capernaum to Caesarea it would be 80 miles, but the geography makes it much father.

Luk 7:1 Now when he had ended all his sayings in the audience of the people, he entered into Capernaum.
Luk 7:2 And a certain centurion's servant, who was dear unto him, was sick, and ready to die.
--The centurion was from Capernaum.
These are two different men, not to be confused.

He was not saved. God had not quickened him. You are reading your Calvinism into this. The scripture nowhere says this. Why must you read Calvinism into the scriptures even when it isn't there?

I believe I am right simply because it follows the pattern of another incident, which is the passage of scripture I should have referred to in the first place.
Let's look at it:

Joh 4:47 When he heard that Jesus was come out of Judaea into Galilee, he went unto him, and besought him that he would come down, and heal his son: for he was at the point of death.
Joh 4:48 Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.
--This time Jesus is going from Judea into Galilee. A nobleman approaches him and beseeches him to heal his son for he is dying. The same situation is in play. He is exercising great faith.

oh 4:49 The nobleman saith unto him, Sir, come down ere my child die.
Joh 4:50 Jesus saith unto him, Go thy way; thy son liveth. And the man believed the word that Jesus had spoken unto him, and he went his way.
--His faith was not as great as the centurion's in that he wanted Christ to come to his house. But Jesus told him his son was healed. Then the account reads the man believed the word Jesus had spoken unto him which makes his faith as great as the centurion's for his son was some distance away. He had great faith. He believed. But was he saved? What was the source of his faith?

Joh 4:51 And as he was now going down, his servants met him, and told him, saying, Thy son liveth.
Joh 4:52 Then enquired he of them the hour when he began to amend. And they said unto him, Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left him.
--Having left Jesus he continues on his way home. His servants meet him on the way and inform him that his son, previously at the point of death, is now healed. He asked what time? It was yesterday at the 7th hour. That was the time that he was speaking to Christ!

Therefore:
Joh 4:53 So the father knew that it was at the same hour, in the which Jesus said unto him, Thy son liveth: and himself believed, and his whole house.
--Now he believed that Christ was the Messiah, the Son of God. Now he and all his family were saved. This is the time of his salvation--more than a full day after he believed or put his faith in Christ to heal his son.

The centurion put faith in Christ to heal his daughter. That doesn't mean he was saved. It was faith in Christ's ability to heal, not ability to save. Nowhere does the account say that. The account is just like this one. One cannot read into the account more than it says.

Many put their faith in Christ to heal, but not to save.
Ten lepers came to Jesus. All put their faith in Christ to heal them.
Only one put his faith in Christ to save him, and he was a Samaritan.

 

What is and whose is, "the faith," that declares one to be righteous?

for sin over you shall not have lordship, for ye are not under law, but under grace. Rom 6:14 YLT What exactly removed one from being under the law?

And before the coming of the faith, under law we were being kept, shut up to the faith about to be revealed, Gal 3:23

Whatever declared one to be righteous, was the faith, revealed. And is the faith, one heard of, by which one received the Spirit rather than by the works of the law.

much more, then, having been declared righteous now in his blood, we shall be saved through him from the wrath; Romans 614 YLT
so that the law became our child-conductor -- to Christ, that by faith (By His Blood?) we may be declared righteous,

But it required more than just the shedding of blood, the pouring out of the soul unto death, for nothing dead could bring righteousness. If Jesus the Christ had remained dead, we would still be in our sins. 1 Cor 15:17 YLT and if Christ hath not risen, vain is your faith, ye are yet in your sins;

Paul, an apostle -- not from men, nor through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who did raise him out of the dead -- Gal 1:1 YLT

for by grace ye are having been saved, through (the) faith, and this not of you -- of God the gift, Eph 2:8 YLT

that having been declared righteous by His grace, heirs we may become according to the hope of life age-during. Titus 3:7 YLT


Does God give one the Spirit because they believe that or something else? Or is God taking out of the nations a people for his name and giving them the Spirit of truth?

Only worthily of the good news of the Christ conduct ye yourselves, that, whether having come and seen you, whether being absent I may hear of the things concerning you, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one soul, striving together for the faith of the good news, and not terrified in anything by those opposing, which to them indeed is a token of destruction, and to you of salvation, and that from God; (Eph 2:8) because to you it was granted, on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in him, but also on behalf of him to suffer; Phil 1:27-29 YLT

And the Lord said unto him, 'Be going on, because a choice vessel to Me is this one, to bear My name before nations and kings -- the sons also of Israel; for I will shew him how many things it behoveth him for My name to suffer.' Acts 9:15,16 YLT

 

percho

This is blasphemy at its Highest against the Death and Blood of Christ. The Death of Christ alone made them He lived and died for Righteous ! Heres proof Rom 5:19

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

The Obedience of One here refers strictly to Christ's Obedience unto Death Phil 2:8

8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

By this obedience of His, Many are made Righteous ! The word made in Rom 5:19 is the greek word kathistémi:

I set down, bring down to a place; I set in order, appoint, make, constitute,

"to set down as, constitute (Latinsisto), equivalent to to declare, show to be":

So Christs death alone declared them Righteous !

The Resurrection of Christ is proof of what His Death done, so we read Rom 4:25

25 Who was delivered for[because of] our offences, and was raised again for[because of] our justification.

He was raised again because of our Justification, which was accomplished by His being delivered for our offences !

The Resurrection proves your comment to be blasphemous and against Christ, this comment right here of yours:

Because Christ's Death, being dead, did bring Righteousness ! Thats why Jesus said at the moment of His decease Jn 19:30

30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

This fulfilled the Prophecy of Daniel Dan 9:24

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

 

Now you are coming closer to my position. Yes, Jesus healed multitudes whether or not they had faith. I agree with MacArthur sermon, always have. That is exactly what I have been pointing out all this time. They had the faith to believe Christ could heal, but not that Christ could save.
The same is true with the centurion; faith that Christ could heal, but not that Christ could save.
The same was true of the nobleman; faith that Christ could heal but not that Christ could save. However, with the nobleman when his son was healed, the evidence was there, and he did believe, not just that Christ healed but that he was the Messiah the King of Israel, and he became a believer right then and there. That is what the account says.

In both of those accounts we have expressions such as "according to your faith," "believed," etc. Faith is involved. They did have faith.

Jesus can and did heal multitudes that had no faith. That is another topic.
In fact I use that argument a lot with faith healers today in James 5.
Whose faith is held accountable when one is not healed? (Actually it is God's will). But the passage in James 5 says,
Jas 5:15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick,...
The prayer of faith is that of the pastor's, not that of the sick person.
Today's so-called faith healer blames the sick and tells them they didn't have enough faith. But that is a different topic.

Jesus healed all that came to him whether or not they had faith.

But when the passage specifically speaks about faith we must deal with that faith.
When it says that the centurion had greater faith than anyone else in Israel what does it mean? Faith to be healed or faith to be saved? I think the answer is obvious.