I know I am not the only one who has presented Scripture and asked James questions that have been ignored and gone unanswered. So I'll just keep bringing this back up until he will address them. :goofball:
The following Scriptures from the Word of God prove to us that Jesus is the Saviour of the World, meaning that His death paid for every sin of every person Not of just 'some', but for "all", and offering salvation to all who will believe, no matter your sin.
Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. - Romans 5:18,19
Can anyone say "all" have sinned, but not "all" have the free gift offered them by Christ's death in the above verse?
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. - Isaiah 53:6
Can anyone say the iniquity laid on Christ wasn't really for the sins of "all"?
For this [is] good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. - 1 Timothy 2:3-6
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. - 1 Timothy 4:10
We are told God is the Saviour of ALL men, specially of the those that believe. Two groups.. all men [sinners] and those that believe and have accepted Christ.
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. - 2 Peter 3:9
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world. - 1 John 2:2
But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. - Hebrews 2:9
By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all]. - Hebrews 10:10
For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: And [that] he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again. - 2 Corinthians 5:14
You can't argue that all are born into sin, dead in our sins, but can you question the rest of that verse, saying that Christ didn't die for all?
For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. - Romans 5:6
Jesus said - "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me." - John 12:32
Speaking of Jesus, John wrote - [That] was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. - John 1:9
EVERY man that cometh into the world. Every man will make his own decision to trust Christ or to reject Him.
All have sinned. All are ungodly. These are who Christ died for.
Come unto me, all [ye] that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. - Matthew 11:28,29
Where in the above verse does Jesus state this was for the "elect" only? In fact, where in any of the Scriptures I've offered do you find Jesus died for the sins of the "elect" only? Do you see the word "elect" in any of them?
To answer James question in another thread... "If Jesus paid for the sins of all people, then it would be unjust for anyone to be in Hell." --
The death of Christ on the cross was sufficient for all, but it is efficient only to those who believe. Jesus' death made it possible for every man, everywhere, to be saved. But only those who believe that He died to pay their debt and who trust Him completely for salvation will be saved. It's a choice made by each individual.
Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers [did], so [do] ye. - Acts 7:51
There is no irresistible grace in that verse. The Holy Ghost is there, but we see there are those who always choose to resist, indicating they were UNWILLING to accept the message of Jesus Christ. It was their choice.
And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Acts 17:30
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not! - Matthew 23:37
Israel was unwilling to come to the Lord. Jesus said she "would not". Not that she "could not" as if there were no choice given, but that she would not.
If man had no choice to be saved and either one was saved or damned according to Calvinism, God would not need to command all men every where to repent. Saved is saved. You can't command the saved to repent and be saved. For the Calvanist, you cannot say God commands the elect every where to repent and become elect. It wouldn't make sense.
The point is, if we are able to be UNWILLING to come to Christ and are able to RESIST the Holy Spirit, then we have a free will.
For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to ALL men,: Titus 2:11 ____________________________ Behold I stand at the door and knock: if ANY man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. ( Revelation 4:20)
Then Peter opened [his] mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. - Acts 10:34,35,43
How many times must a person read "all", "any", "every", "whosoever" in regards to who Christ died for and who can be saved, and still refuse to accept that all, any, every and whosoever is exactly what it means?
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. - 2 Peter 2:1
Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? - Hebrews 10:29
Limited atonement? Not according to the Word of God. The penalty Christ paid in nailing our sins to the Cross was for all.
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; - Colossians 2:14
Your "sufficient ", "efficient" statement is just about the exact definition of 'limited atonement'. Of course in light of the elect, a definition that makes no sense at all.
I will try and answer your questions, but please understand this.
There is you, PhillipJohn, Twosparrows, Chevy, ET, and GodsJude.
That is six people, Against me, PLUS a couple of other people who ask me questions from time to time.
And lets be honest, several threads specifically to attack Calvinism and plenty of comments that are just sarcastic, not anything that could be discussed intelligently.
So PLEASE understand if I miss a question or two,
AND......if you are REALLY serious about wanting to LEARN more about the historic Christian faith, then you should go to websites like:
http://www.monergism.com/
http://www.oldtruth.com/
http://www.apuritansmind.com/
I mean if I wanted to really know something concerning the history of Christianity, or Theology, I would not just focus on
ONE guy on a discussion group.
Does that make sense?
Go to the experts, not just one person on a discussion group.
And lets be honest......if you are REALLY serious about wanting to LEARN more about the historic Christian faith,"
------------------------
Oh James, if you only would be honest!
The historic Christian faith!...:ROFL:
Um duh... the Catholic faith is older, Arminianism is almost excatly the same age, not to mention many others which are as old or older. Typical Calvinist thought...the one true doctrine of the specially chosen, "the historic Christian faith"
Two days ago, I posted quotes by the early church fathers who believed that Jesus died specifically for the elect.
They started at about 300AD. This was BEFORE there was a Roman Catholic church.
The only comment was "we don't care what those people said."
If I quote anyone after the Reformation, it will be dismissed as a
"follower of Calvin" and when I quote any Christian before the Reformation, it will be " we don't care what those people said."
This is sad and childish, but that is the case.
And when I say, "the historic Christian faith" I don't just mean five points of Doctrine.
At my church we say the Apostles Creed. We say it out loud, together as a body.
Now, the Early Christian church did the SAME THING.
In other words, our faith SHOULD be grounded historically, and not just some theological fad, that some one made up in the last ten minutes of church history. For instance Pentecostalism only appeared in the last two minutes of church history.
In the book of Jude it says that we should "contend for the faith that was once and for all delivered to the saints."
So, when I say, the historic Christian faith, I mean CREEDAL Christianity.
Probably the most plausible defense for Arminianism is found in the universalistic passages in Scripture. Three of the most quoted are: II Peter 3:9, "Not wishing [or, KJV, not willing] that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance"; I Tim. 2:4, [God our Savior] "who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth"; and I Tim. 2:5,6, "...Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all."
In regard to these verses we must keep in mind that, as we have said earlier, God is the absolute sovereign Ruler of heaven and earth, and we are never to think of Him as wishing or striving to do what He knows He will not do. For Him to do otherwise would be for Him to act foolishly. Since Scripture tells us that some men are going to be lost, II Peter 3:9 cannot mean that God is earnestly wishing or striving to save all individual men. For if it were His will that every individual of mankind should be saved, then not one soul could be lost. "For who hath resisted his will?" (Rom. 9:19).
These verses simply teach that God is benevolent, and that He does not delight in the sufferings of His creatures any more than a human father delights in the punishment that he sometimes must inflict upon his son. The word "will" is used in different senses in Scripture as in our everyday conversation. It is sometimes used in the sense of "desire" or "purpose." A righteous judge does not will (desire) that anyone should be hanged or sentenced to prison, yet he wills (pronounces sentence) that the guilty person shall be punished. In the same sense and for sufficient reasons a man may will to have a limb removed, or an eye taken out, even though he certainly does not desire it.
Arminians insist that in II Peter 3:9 the words "any" and "all" refer to all mankind without exception. But it is important first of all to see to whom those words were addressed. In the first verse of chapter 1, we find that the epistle is addressed not to mankind at large, but to Christians: "...to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us." And in a preceding verse (3:1), Peter had addressed those to whom he was writing as "beloved." And when we look at the verse as a whole, and not merely at the last half, we find that it is not primarily a salvation verse at all, but a second coming verse! It begins by saying that "The Lord is not slacking concerning his promise" [singular]. What promise? Verse 4 tells us: "the promise of his coming." The reference is to His second coming, when He will come for judgment, and the wicked will perish in the lake of fire. The verse has reference to a limited group. It says that the Lord is "long-suffering to us-ward," His elect, many of whom had not yet been regenerated, and who therefore had not yet come to repentance. Hence we may quite properly read verse 9 as follows: "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise as some count slackness, but is long-suffering toward us, not willing that any of us should perish, but that all of us should come to repentance."
In regard to I Tim. 2:4,6 "Who would have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth ... who gave himself a ransom for all," is used in various senses. Oftentimes it means, not all men without exception, but all men without distinction - Jews and Gentiles, bond and free, men and women, rich and poor. And in I Tim. 2:4-6 it clearly is used in that sense. Through many centuries the Jews had been, with few exceptions, the exclusive recipients of God's saving grace. They had become the most intensely nationalistic and intolerant people in the world. Instead of recognizing their position as that of God's representatives to all the people of the world, they had taken those blessings to themselves. Even the early Christians for a time were inclined to appropriate the mission of the Messiah only to themselves. The salvation of the Gentiles was a mystery that had not been known in other ages (Eph. 4:6; Col. 1:27). So rigid was the pharisaic exclusivism that the Gentiles were called unclean, common, sinners of the Gentiles, even dogs; and it was not lawful for a Jew to keep company with or have any deals with a Gentile (John 4:9, Acts 10:28, 11:3). After an orthodox Jew had been out in the marketplace where he had come in contact with Gentiles he was regarded as unclean (Mark 7:4). After Peter had preached to the Roman Centurion Cornelius and the others who were gathered at his house, he was severely taken to task by the Church in Jerusalem, and we can almost hear the gasp of wonder when, after Peter told them what had happened, they said, "Then to the Gentiles also hath God granted repentance to life" (Acts 22:15), that is, not to every individual in the world, but to Jews and Gentiles alike. Used in this sense the word "all" has no reference to individuals, but simply to mankind in general.
When it was said of John the Baptist that "There went out unto him all the country of Judea, and all they of Jerusalem; and they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins" (Mark 1:5), we know that not every individual did so respond. We read that after Peter and John had healed the lame man at the door of the temple, "all men glorified God for that which was done" (Acts 4:21). Jesus told his disciples that they would be "hated of all men" for His name's sake (Luke 21:17). And when Jesus said, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto myself" (John 12:32), He certainly did not mean that every individual of mankind would be so drawn. What He did mean was that Jews and Gentiles, men of all nations and races, would be drawn to Him. And that is what we see is actually happening.
In I Cor. 15:22 we read, "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be make alive." This verse is often quoted by Arminians to prove unlimited or universal atonement. This verse is from Paul's famous resurrection chapter, and the context makes it clear that he is not talking about life in this age, whether physical or spiritual, but about the resurrection life. Christ is the first to enter the resurrection life, then, when He comes, His people also enter into their resurrection life. And what Paul says is that at that time a glorious resurrection life will become a reality, not for all mankind, but for all those who are in Christ. And this point is illustrated by the well known fact that the race fell in Adam, who acted as its federal head and representative. What Paul says in effect this: "For as all born in Adam die, so also all born again in Christ shall be make alive." Verse 22, therefore, refers not to something past, nor to something present, but to something future; and it has no special bearing at all on the Calvinistic-Arminian controversy.
Two other verses that also are often quoted in defense of Arminianism are "Behold, I stand at the door, I will come in to him and will sup with him, and he with me" (Rev. 3:20); and "...he that will [KJV, whosoever will], let him take the water of life freely" (Rev. 22:17). This general invitation is extended to all men. It may be, and often is, the means that the Holy Spirit uses to arouse in certain individuals the desire for salvation as He puts forth His supernatural power to regenerate them. But these verses, taken by themselves, fail to take into consideration the truth that already has been stressed in this article, that fallen man is spiritually dead, and that as such he is as totally unable to respond to the invitation as are the fallen angels or demons. Fallen man is as dead spiritually as Lazarus was dead physically until Jesus cried with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth," and the Pharisee Nicodemus, "Except one be born anew [or, from above], he cannot see the kingdom of God"(John 3:3). And again, He said to the Pharisees, "why do ye not understand my speech? Even because ye cannot hear my word" (John 8:43). Apart from that divine assistance no one can hear the invitation or put forth the will to come to Christ.
The declaration that Christ died for "all" is made clearer by the song that the redeemed sing before the throne of the Lamb: "Thou wast slain, and didst purchase unto God with thy blood men of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation" (Rev. 5:9). Oftentimes the word "all" must be understood to mean all the elect, all His Church, all those whom the Father has given to the Son, as when Christ says, "All that which the Father giveth me shall come to me" (John 6:37), but not all men universally and every man individually. The redeemed host will be make up of men from all classes and conditions of life, of princes and peasants, of rich and poor, bond and free, male and female, Jews and Gentiles, men of all nations and races. That is the true universalism of Scripture.
I have no desire to read the rest of the article, james. All the answers I need are in the Living Word. As Rk said in his earlier post if we abide In Christ we don't need to be taught by any man. The Holy Ghost is my Teacher and he has shown me the doctrine of calvinism is not of God.
I am with Chevy on this, I have prayed about it and I to believe that the Holy Spirit is the only teacher, and my teacher. If we all only relied on historic faith we all would still be Catholics and the Catholic would be practicing Judaism. So your argument about whose faith is older holds no water for me. What does hold water is a honest, balanced view of Scripture taught by the Holy Spirit.
Btw, your doctrine has divine paradoxes and scriptures that contradict, and my view of Scripture agrees with all of Scripture, funny how you repeatedly ignore that fact.
James wrote - "I will try and answer your questions, but please understand this. There is you, PhillipJohn, Twosparrows, Chevy, ET, and GodsJude. That is six people, Against me, PLUS a couple of other people who ask me questions from time to time. And lets be honest, several threads specifically to attack Calvinism and plenty of comments that are just sarcastic, not anything that could be discussed intelligently. So PLEASE understand if I miss a question or two,"
I understand that you are in the minority here when it comes to your doctrine, but you came here with your doctrine, pasting and continuing to paste your doctrine with several articles written by others to promote your doctrine. This is a discussion forum. Those of us who do not agree with your doctrine are going to question it. I'm sure you take that into consideration when you post anything Calvinism. If you have difficulty keeping up, try dealing with less articles that you paste here and address the questions instead of pasting more articles having to do with Reformed Theology. Personally, I find it rather rude that many times you will answer our questions with an article written by someone other than you. I don't care to discuss Scripture and my questions with an article. Furthermore, while these articles may speak for you, you can't speak for those who wrote them, so we are basically left to discuss and question these doctrinal beliefs with an unseen, unknown, stranger. How can we take you seriously if you don't speak for yourself? How can we discuss and question your doctrine with you, if you don't speak for yourself but instead let others speak for you through articles you paste in almost every thread?
James wrote - "AND......if you are REALLY serious about wanting to LEARN more about the historic Christian faith, then you should go to websites like: http://www.monergism.com/
http://www.oldtruth.com/ http://www.apuritansmind.com/ I mean if I wanted to really know something concerning the history of Christianity, or Theology, I would not just focus on ONE guy on a discussion group."
I am not interested in learning about historic Christianity with you. What I am interested in are YOUR answers to questions regarding Scripture that disproves much of what you believe.
James wrote - "Does that make sense? Go to the experts, not just one person on a discussion group."
The experts? As opposed to the Word of God? Truthfully, I don't read any links you post here and have no desire to. If we can't find truth in Scripture, we aren't going to find it anywhere else.
