[Luke]

(Luke)
Except that God's standard of goodness is norminative because He is the location of ultimacy, and Satan (or us, for that matter) are not.

(hananiel)
How will you know whats NORMATIVE if you read scripture wrong?

(Luke)
First of all, God's standard of goodness being normative is completely independent of my reading of Scripture. It should fall under the category of "bleeding obvious" that God's standard of goodness supercedes any standards suggested by creation.



(hananiel)
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.

DOES NOT imply what you said.

(Luke)
It not only implies, but requires it. There is nobody in that equation who is drawn but isn't raised up.

(hananiel)
lets try again.
There are red apples, green apples and oranges.

A guy says No fruit thats not an apple will be taken.
we agree oranges dont make it.

Lets see why both red and green apples, wont make it.

the guy comes and picks all red apples.

Was he lying?

(Luke)
But there aren't three groups in John 6:44. There are two. The drawn and the not drawn.



(Luke)
That one's heart turns away from God's command does not require that this was done against God's sovereign will (which is distinct from his moral will).
And Isaiah 46:10 wasn't allowing for exceptions.

(hananiel)
Neither was John 3:16. We know which is the key verse.

(Luke)
Scripture is immutable...you can't just dismiss Isaiah 46:10 as wrong because you want to (which is what you're trying to do).

John 3:16 says "whoever believes will be saved". I'm not debating that. Only those who believe are saved, and that is not everyone.



(hananiel)
again, can you love a prostitute, who gives pleasure for money? Why do you think God kept comparing israel to a prostitute?

(Luke)
How does that address what I said at all?

(hananiel)
Tried to explain the intrinsic meaning of LOVE. you cannot love robots. You can love even people, when they of all the other people they can love, love you. You cannot buy it or decree it.

(Luke)
Just because we cannot build a "robot" with real love does not presuppose God cannot (even though that analogy is faulty since we are moral agents under Calvinism anyway)

We can have real love for God and our neighbor because God gives us real love for Himself and our neighbor. In no way does Calvinism make our love for God any less ours.

What I stated earlier was that we do not love God intrinsically (or autonomously). In other words, left to ourselves, we will never love or desire God in any way.



(hananiel)
Yes, by themselves, but "whoever believes" will be saved. You dont address what happens when God seeks the sinner.

(Luke)
If nobody seeks God, nobody will intrinsically believe. God must "make us alive" (Ephesians 2:4).
The raising of Lazarus from the dead was not a cooperative effort between Christ and Lazarus. Christ did it alone.

Scripture uses the picture of "dead in sins" and being "made alive" in Ephesians 2 for a reason.

(hananiel)
Christ died for our sins when we were dead in our sins. Salvation is very very different from physical death.

(Luke)
Salvation is a parallel to a resurrection, not a death.

(hananiel)
Of course all scripture is there for contorting it.

(Luke)
Is this an accusation or are you speaking of yourself?



(Luke)
What about the "save" part? Note that Christ saves by Himself....no cooperative effort involved.

(hananiel)
you answer seek, Ill answer save.

(Luke)
Christ never does one without the other. Those He seeks, He necessarily finds.



(Luke)
God's calling is nowhere stated to be based on foreknowledge of our decisions.

(hananiel)
The physical man, cannot understand the things of God.

(Luke)
Copout. We can insomuch as He has revealed them to us (Deut. 29:29).



(Luke)
What is that supposed to mean? What argument have I ignored?

(hananiel)
Dearest Luke. If you think I dont understand your strategy. When people make a strong scriptural case against your tenets, you ignore them or close the thread. But when people make statements of belief, without scriptural support, you attack those points that you know can best be supported by contorting scripture, and use them. If you look back up in this post, I have made a pretty sturdy case and you will address it, if you support the truth.

(Luke)
I've answered you in point-by-point rebuttal format...how can you accuse me of ignoring you?
If there is an entire post I've missed (which is possible), say something and I will address it.

And I haven't closed any threads in this forum in several weeks--not since you came that I can recall. Bryan closed several because of questionable behavior by RECUSA, but I had nothing to do with that.

[ChrisHarbison]

I think this is great!

Hananiel

Everything in the world happens by the will of God

But yet God "has no say in mans' salvation, but wishes he did." So how is this god sovereign...this god is NOT mentioned in my Bible.

The paradox:
Freewill in no way deals with this, Luke's right. The fact that ALL things were created BY GOD AND FOR GOD leaves you with a problem. If all things were created by God, then evil falls within the realm of "all" unless of course God was just kidding or forgot to mention "all good things according to the standards of the almight human" and thus God was confused.

[ChrisHarbison]

(hananiel)
How will you know whats NORMATIVE if you read scripture wrong?

Good point...perhaps you should read Scripture for what it says and stop reading into it what you want it to say.

[Luke]

(Bob_the_Veggie)
How does this work? Isn't it a violation of your free will for Him to keep you saved?

Your inconsistency gets the best of you again...when does your god become Sovereign in your gospel? Because if he isn't Sovereign to begin with, how does that change occur?

(hananiel)
It would be a violation if I became sinfree.

(Luke)
?

(hananiel)
That was the whole work of the cross. To allow men to come into the presense of a righteous God.

(Luke)
Or, if you want to be Biblical about things, you could say that the Cross actually expiates sin and turns away God's wrath (1 John 2:2). Of course, that would necessarily lead to limited atonement...

(hananiel)
NO ONE who has tasted of the love of God can go back, recant.

(Luke)
Why not? If man autonomously chooses to come (note the word autonomously), shouldn't he be able to autonomously choose to leave?

(hananiel)
That's why there are people who die for their faith.

(Luke)
Relevency?

[ChrisHarbison]

(hananiel)
That was the whole work of the cross. To allow men to come into the presense of a righteous God.

Then God's a miserable failure since the majority of creation will go to hell.

[Luke]

I went back and looked and realized that I did, in fact, miss a post. Sorry about that. I am addressing it now.



(hananiel)
All these arguments are not mine. I found it comfortable to paste some arguments by John R Rice of Sword of the Lord.

(Luke)
For future reference, this is in violation of forum rules (and probably copyright as well). You are to write your own arguments unless you are just answering a question and not in a debating mode. This is out of respect for the time of others, as it will take me an hour or more to respond to this, even though it probably took you five minutes to paste it all in.

(hananiel)
[Calvinists,] Allow for the inherent perspicuity of scripture.

(Luke)
What does "perspicuity" mean? (I'm not trying to pull a stunt on you; I honestly don't know)

(hananiel)
I made the decision that Calvinism has to be wrong by seeing the contradictions in my experience.

(Luke)
Making experience the ultimate test of truth...



(Luke)
You are assuming that we are called on the basis of our love for God or if our love for God is an ultimate result of our calling.

(hananiel)
I have concluded that we are called unconditionally - not conditioned by works. But whether we respond is by our will. I will try to convince you over this debate.

(Luke)
I have no idea what I was smoking when I wrote my sentence above (I just read it and it makes no sense), but election (not calling) is not based on works, yes. But it also occurs before we are actually saved.

It should also be noted here that repentance in Scripture is spoken of thrice as something that is granted (Acts 5:31, 11:18, 2 Timothy 2:25). You say that God calls and then we can accept or reject, but in reality, unless God grants repentance, we will always reject. Those to whom God grants repentance will always accept.



(Luke)
Seeing as the end of Romans 8 doesn't answer this question, we must look to other passages which do address this chronology. Passages like Romans 3 and Ephesians 2 are particularly relevant here.

(hananiel)
Romans 8:28And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

Romans 3:22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.
Who what? Believe. Do I read predestined to believe.
Ephesians 2: talks about grace and works is irrelevant here.

I cannot help but wonder at the providence of the Holy spirit in calvin proofing these verses. I cannot still understand how some on can read something else.

(Luke)
Romans 3:22 does not address predestination. Righteousness does come to those who believe. But who believes? Those who were predestined to believe (John 10:27-30).

The beginning of Ephesians 2 is particularly relevant. God "made us alive" while we were dead...it wasn't a cooperative effort, God did it. Faith is not of ourselves (2:8).



(Luke)
I am not debating that God has foreknowledge of events---I am debating that this is not what his election is based on.

(hananiel)
These verses show Gods plan for those who believe. And that God foreknew them. There is nothing in the verse to show which occurs first. Your havent given any better reason than your preference.

(Luke)
As previously mentioned (although you blew it off), the Greek word that we translate "foreknew" (proginosko) does not allow for your interpretation. You say God foreknew a list of who would be saved, and predestined and called those. I say God marked electing love on some, and on that basis predestined and called them. And the word used in Romans 8 here supports my assertion, not yours.

And it should also be noted that, despite your accusation, you have nothing but your preference.

(hananiel)
What does it mean when you say someone knows some one? Their name? Their facial attributes? Their parents? Its your fallacy that knowledge of people precludes all qualifying attributes. It has to include at least one and consequently it can be love or just a trust in God, a belief.

(Luke)
Of course God foreknows (prognosis) our belief (this is not stated in Scripture but is rather obvious), I'm not questioning that. However, our election is not based on this. Our election is based on his foreknowledge (proginosko) of us.

I'm not pulling Greek words to sound smart or to confuse you (or others), I'm pulling them because there is an actual difference that needs to be addressed.



(Luke)
The question, then, ought to be asked--are we capable of being able to love God apart from being called by Him? The answer to this question is clear.

This is the Word of God:
As it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one; 11There is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God (Romans 3:10-11, NASB)

(hananiel)
Your supporting verse says no one will seek Him. Your assertion is on if we can Love him. Even if I agree to that, it doesnt address what will happen when they are called as in presented with the Gospel. When God seeks men through his servants.

(Luke)
If one is presented with the Gospel and they are not seeking God, they are not going to just up and start seeking God. Romans 3 is a treatise on the condition of man's heart, which doesn't change on the basis of an external Gospel presentation.

And those who do not seek God do not love Him either, because if they loved Him, they would seek and follow Him (John 14:15).



(Luke)
I believe God knew. I just don't believe that it's the basis of election.

(hananiel)
You cannot make faith statements in a logical debate.

(Luke)
I'm not. You were trying to make it sound like I had said God doesn't even know who will believe or not, which is not what I believe or what I had said. I am clarifying my position as a response to your attempt to misrepresent it.

(hananiel)
Anyway I reconsider, my stand point. I agree to unconditional election as much as it involves works. But I dont believe that its a lie that whoever believes will be saved.

(Luke)
Did I ever say that "whoever believes will be saved" was a lie? No! I believe wholeheartedly that whoever believes will be saved. The question behind Calvinism is not whether whoever believes will be saved, but rather what causes one to believe and another not to believe.

(hananiel)
Nor do I believe that when Jesus in his "reformed"(to the Jews) Law says,"The work of God is to believe in His son, he was lying.

(Luke)
Where did Jesus say this?



(hananiel)
Clearly nothing here says he made them beleive. They had to do that act of making a choice a decision to believe in His son. It also indicates free will.

(Luke)
Nobody said anything about making people believe. And nowhere do these verses require any sort of autonomous will. Man is "free" to choose what he desires, which as we have seen from Scripture--is always sin (Gen. 6:5--others could be offered).

(hananiel)
Genesis 6
5 The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.
7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth-men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air-for I am grieved that I have made them." 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD .

Now you can suppose there was a reason for Noah finding favor and look for it.
Or you can assume that there was no reason that has been given for us to know.
You cannot give that to prove Noah was predestined. Does the verse read, and Noah was appointed / chosen / predestined to do something?

If at all you want to find the correct answer, you can read the next verse: Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God.

(Luke)
You are begging the question, was Noah righteous autonomously or was Noah righteous because God regenerated him? The answer must be the latter---if Noah was righteous autonomously then Genesis 6:5 would be a false statement.

And yes, I can state with confidence that Noah was predestined / chosen / appointed on the basis of the fact that he was righteous.



(hananiel)
It is true the saved are God's elect, "chosen... in him before the foundation of the world," as Ephesians 1:4 tells us. But it is wrong to make this election a whim of God whereby He saves some, compels them to be saved, and damns some whom He has decided He does not wish to save. No, election is not "unconditional." It is simply that God knows who will trust Him when they hear the Gospel and chooses them to be carried through till they be "conformed to the image of his Son."

(Luke)
This is an obvious cut and paste, and it's just a repeat of what you've been saying above. However, the word "election" in Scripture is not a synonym for "factual foreknowledge". The author ignores this important distinction.

(hananiel)
Total Depravity

The doctrine that all are sinful, incapable of being saved or doing good without God's help, is true. But it is certainly not true that some never could repent, that God leaves some intentionally without light or calling. Consider these Scriptures:

a. "God... now commandeth all men every where to repent" (Acts 17:30). Can anyone accuse God of commanding people to do what He has made it impossible for them to do?

(Luke)
Why would that be an accusation? It is God's right to command of people what they are incapable of doing. Example: "be perfect" (Matthew 5:48). Unless you believe mankind is autonomously capable of perfection, we must reject that we necessarily have the ability to keep God's commands.

(hananiel)
b. The apostle said, after hearing of Cornelius' conversion, "Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life" (Acts 11:18). God granted repentance to the Jews; now they see repentance is granted "to the Gentiles" -- not to a few selected individuals, but to the Gentiles, as to Jews.

(Luke)
So is every Gentile saved? Because everyone to whom repentance is granted is obviously saved (Acts 2:38).

(hananiel)
c. In John 1:9 we are told about Jesus, "That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." So every man in the world has light from God and from Christ, and so could be saved.

(Luke)
Argument presupposes conclusion.

(hananiel)
d. In John 12:32,33, Jesus said, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die." When Jesus draws "all men" unto Him, then any one of "all men" could be saved.

(Luke)
There are seven different definitions of the word for "all" (pas) here. At the risk of belaboring this point, I am going to list all seven and different Scriptures where each is used. You will note that in many cases, the word "all" cannot mean "the entire human race" (or "every existing example of") as that would make the cooresponding verse make no sense.

1. the universe as a whole (Acts 17:14)
2. the planet earth (John 13:1, Eph. 1:4)
3. the world-system (John 12:31, 1 John 2:15)
4. the entire human race; every man (Romans 3:19)
5. humanity, excluding believers (John 15:18)
6. Genties in contrast to Jews (Romans 11:12)
7. humanity, considered in the light of God's eschatological redemptive design (John 3:16-17, 6:33)

(This list is originally from Douglas Wilson; Back to the Basics (Hagopian), page 48)

It is your assumption here that John 12 must be referring to definition 4. Definition 6 fits much better in the context of Scripture, since the opening of salvation to Gentiles was a big deal. Also, all who are drawn are saved (John 6:44), so saying that all are drawn would lead to universalism.

(hananiel)
e. Romans 1:18-21 says that after the flood, the races became heathen, idolators, barbarians, and are without excuse because the truth of God was manifested unto them. It says:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteonsness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousnes; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened"

(Luke)
This poses no difficulty for the Calvinist position.

(hananiel)
f. Psalm 19:1-4 tells us:

"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun."

So there is a speech in nature to turn men to seek God. It speaks in all the world and every man is therefore accountable to God for it.

(Luke)
This passage does not say anywhere that speech in nature "turn[s] men to seek God". Nowhere. And obviously it can't, since nobody seeks God (Romans 3:10-11).

(hananiel)
g. Romans 2:11-16 says:

"For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be jasitfied. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another,) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel."

Does that not mean that every person in the world is warned from God, either by the Word or by God speaking through the law He has written in their hearts, that is, their consciences?

(Luke)
Which does not presuppose that everyone has the ability to accept the Gospel.

(hananiel)
And God, in this matter, has "no respect of persons," we are told here, giving every man alike a call to be saved.

(Luke)
Argument presupposes conclusion. In actuality, Romans 2 is a passage about justice...in other words, God cannot be unjust toward one person by sweeping sin under the rug. But the doctrine of election (and irresistible grace) in no way violate God's justice.

The author here is saying that God's being "no respecter of persons" presupposes that He must give all a call to be saved. Of course, if one took this to it's logical conclusion, we would have to say that God must give everyone the same degree of oppertunity (which He obviously does not do).

(hananiel)
All who seek more light find enough light even as Cornelius did in Acts 10.

(Luke)
He who does evil hates the light (John 3:20).

(hananiel)
Man's sinfulness does not mean some men could not be saved.

(Luke)
It most certainly does! If we are dead in sin (Eph. 2:1), we can do nothing to make ourselves alive. We aren't seeking God (Romans 3:10-11), we have no desire to please God, and indeed, we cannot do so (Romans 8:8). Every intention of our hearts is evil (Genesis 8:21), and we will not come to the light, for fear of being exposed (John 3:20).

In this condition, nobody can accept the Gospel because nobody desires the Gospel or God. It is only when God works in us that we will come to the light (John 3:21).

(hananiel)
h. We are told that "the gospel of Christ... is the power of God unto salvation" (Rom. 1:16).

(Luke)
For everyone who believes. Important limitation there...

I am continuing my reply in another post because of CGR's character limitation...

[ChrisHarbison]

Originally posted by hananiel
[B]
I made the decision that Calvinism has to be wrong by seeing the contradictions in my experience.

And I came to the conclusion that it's right based on the "blissfully ignored" Bible.

NKJV Romans 8

Romans 8:28And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.
Romans 3:22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.
Who what? Believe. Do I read predestined to believe.
Ephesians 2: talks about grace and works is irrelevant here.

Stop ignoring scripture...Rom 8:29-30, who believes? Those predestined to do so...and who are predestined, those who God knew intimately before they ever existed. So you're point is flawed.

(Luke)
The question, then, ought to be asked--are we capable of being able to love God apart from being called by Him? The answer to this question is clear.

This is the Word of God:
As it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one; 11There is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God (Romans 3:10-11, NASB)
(hananiel)
Your supporting verse says no one will seek Him. Your assertion is on if we can Love him. Even if I agree to that, it doesnt address what will happen when they are called as in presented with the Gospel. When God seeks men through his servants.

Yes, no one will seek Him because we all hate him and are enemies of God. The point is, apart from the grace of God, no one can or will even WANT to come to Christ...it's by grace alone through faith alone.

[/quote]
(Hananiel)
Clearly nothing here says he made them beleive. They had to do that act of making a choice a decision to believe in His son. It also indicates free will. [/quote]

I'm all ears, please explain how.

Now you can suppose there was a reason for Noah finding favor and look for it.
Or you can assume that there was no reason that has been given for us to know.
You cannot give that to prove Noah was predestined. Does the verse read, and Noah was appointed / chosen / predestined to do something?

I think this may be the most irrelevant thing I've heard yet.

If at all you want to find the correct answer, you can read the next verse: Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God.

And WHY did he walk with God...according to the previous very, Noah's heart is evil continually, but for some reason, he found favor in God's sight. That reason you say is because Noah walked with God, agreed, but WHY did Noah walk with God? Because his "freewill" decided to chose something he couldn't chose, or because he actually was predestined and called by God to do so thus given the grace necessary to follow God.

It is true the saved are God's elect, "chosen... in him before the foundation of the world," as Ephesians 1:4 tells us. But it is wrong to make this election a whim of God whereby He saves some, compels them to be saved, and ****s some whom He has decided He does not wish to save. No, election is not "unconditional." It is simply that God knows who will trust Him when they hear the Gospel and chooses them to be carried through till they be "conformed to the image of his Son."

Scripture support please since Rom. 9:22-23 and 1 Thes. 5:9 both state quite clearly otherwise.

a. "God... now commandeth all men every where to repent" (Acts 17:30). Can anyone accuse God of commanding people to do what He has made it impossible for them to do?

"Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect" (Matt. 5:48)...that's certainly not possible, yet it's commanded by God. The entire Levitical law was given to the Israelites, it's certainly not possible to obey that in it's entirety, yet they were commanded to do so.

c. In John 1:9 we are told about Jesus, "That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." So every man in the world has light from God and from Christ, and so could be saved.

d. In John 12:32,33, Jesus said, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die." When Jesus draws "all men" unto Him, then any one of "all men" could be saved.

Irrelevant, Rom. 1 says that everything proclaims the glory of God so that all men are without excuse, simply because Christ is presented to all, doesn't presuppose that all are able to come to Him. Ahh, look, you posted it for me, thank you .

e. Romans 1:18-21 says that after the flood, the races became heathen, idolators, barbarians, and are without excuse because the truth of God was manifested unto them. It says:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteonsness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousnes; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened"

And God, in this matter, has "no respect of persons," we are told here, giving every man alike a call to be saved. All who seek more light find enough light even as Cornelius did in Acts 10.

Being chosen doesn't mean God said, "I sure do like you more than that loser, you're going to heaven and he's going to hell...just cuz you're cooler than he is." And it's already been established (for those willing to accept Scripture) that man CANNOT and WANTS NOT to follow or seek God. No one seeks for God (Rom 3:11). The only way to seek for God, is by his grace compelling you to seek after that which you hate.

Limited Atonement...
It really claims that God did not love all men enough to have Christ die for all, that His grace is limited, so is finite instead of infinite. But this is contradicted by many plain Scriptures.

Hahahaha, no one believes this, nor is it even hinted as being true, come on.

a. John 3:16 says that "God so loved THE WORLD, that he gave his only begotten Son" -- that it was so that "whosoever" could believe on Him and be saved. No limited love or atonement in John 3:16!

Yes, the universal refutation to the Bible, I mean Calvinism...let's examine this passage closer rather than focusing on one verse, blissfully ignoring the rest:

Verses 20 and 21 tells us WHO will believe:
"those who do wicked things hate the light...those who do what is true, comes to the light" Must I again state the obvious point made in Scripture over and over that "No one seeks God" and "no one does good, no not one." So then, if all are evil and all do wicked, then all hate the light and are hell-bound. How then can we do good? God's grace with is given to through the blood of Christ "which was poured out to cover the sins of MANY." (Heb. 9). So, is John 3:16 a cure-all for Calvinism? By no means, it supports it..."whoever believes will be saved" and the rest of the passage tells us who the "whosoever" is.

John 1:29 we read the inspired statenent of John the Baptist about Jesus, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world," Since Christ atoned for "the sin of the world," not just part of the sin of the world, it could not be a limited atonement.

Matt. 26:28, Christ says, "this is my blood, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sin."

Heb. 9:28 says Christ was offered up "once for all to bear the sins of many"

We have a problem here...it seems. If you take the interpretation of John 1:29 to support universalism, then you're faced with the problem that Christ atoned for the sins of people that still go to hell. If their sins are atoned for, then they go to heaven. If you interpret it as the same way you interpret the rest of John the Baptist's proclaimation of God, you see that John is proclaiming the way to heaven. Christ has come and "whosoever believes will be saved." This verse cannot be speaking of the active atonement of Christ's blood otherwise no one will be in hell and this we certainly know isn't true.

c. First John 2:2 plainly says, "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world." No limited atonement there!

Argh, haha, read it in context...WHO is John writing to? The Church...he's saying that Christ is the savior of not only the Jews but the Gentiles as well. Again, if this means what you say, then the Bible contradicts itself AND people go to hell whose sins are atoned for thus making Christ's work accomplish the opposite of what it was set forth to accomplish.

what an arrogant wresting of Scriptures it is to say He did not...offer salvation for all!

I've yet to see anyone claim this as true. Providing and offering are totally different. Salvation is offered to all, this is Biblical fact, but salvation is NOT possible for all, only the church.

I'm done for the night, seriously, this post is ridiculously long, when I want to read a book, I'll read one, wow.

[Luke]

Just a quick note before you get into the thread....do not ever do a cut and paste like this again.



(hananiel)
And again Hebrews 4:12 says, "For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart"

Does not that Scripture surely mean that the Scriptures themselves call men to repentance?

(Luke)
The Holy Spirit calls men to repentance. The Scriptures are living and active because and only because the Holy Spirit makes them so. This is why the preaching of Christ crucified is foolishness to those who are not called in 1 Corinthians 1.

(hananiel)
And would you say, like the neo-orthodox teachers who do not accept the Bible as objectively the Word of God, that it becomes the Word of God to individuals only as it affects them?

(Luke)
No, it is the Word of God regardless, they just don't listen to it. THe author is attempting guilt by association here.

(hananiel)
The Word of God itself has supernatural power to affect the lost sinner, and it needs only to be "mixed with faith" (Heb. 4:9.) to save the sinner.

(Luke)
"There remains a Sabbath rest of the people of God" (Hebrews 4:9)

(hananiel)
[Concluding statements about Total Depravity removed...they were summarization of his points already made]

Limited Atonement

Christ did not die for all men, made no provision for them so they could possibly be saved. It really claims that God did not love all men enough to have Christ die for all, that His grace is limited, so is finite instead of infinite. But this is contradicted by many plain Scriptures.

a. John 3:16 says that "God so loved THE WORLD, that he gave his only begotten Son" -- that it was so that "whosoever" could believe on Him and be saved. No limited love or atonement in John 3:16!

(Luke)
God's loving the world does not presuppose that He will save everyone in it.

(hananiel)
b. In John 1:29 we read the inspired statenent of John the Baptist about Jesus, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world," Since Christ atoned for "the sin of the world," not just part of the sin of the world, it could not be a limited atonement.

(Luke)
We are begging the question here...if the sins of everyone in the world is taken away, then why are not all saved? Everyone's sin is gone...there is no sin left to condemn anyone.

"The world" (kosmos) does not mean every single person in this passage. It means Jews plus Gentiles. Interpreting it your way leads to universalism.

(hananiel)
c. First John 2:2 plainly says, "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world." No limited atonement there!

(Luke)
Same thing. World means Gentiles plus Jews.
While kosmos has multiple definitions (six total), the word "propitiation" (hilasmos) has only one definition--turning away God's wrath from the object.

So 1 John 2:2 says: "And he turned away God's wrath for us, and not for us only, but also for the whole world"

If "whole world" here means every single person, everyone is saved. Wrong.

(hananiel)
d. Romans 5:20 says, "Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound." Does not that mean God has grace for all the sin in the world, and even a great surplus? So the total number of people who will ever be born on the earth is a finite counted number that God knows. But the grace of God is infinite, much more than for those who will be saved, even much more than for all the sins of all the people in the world, so says the plain Word of God. Romans 5:20 leaves no limit on the atonement

(Luke)
That grace is infinite does not presuppose that the atonement is unlimited in scope.

(hananiel)
e. First Timothy 4:10 tells of "the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." To those who believe, Christ is a special, personal, accepted Saviour. But to all who have not believed He is potentially and intentionally a Saviour. When God says in the Bible that He has provided a "Saviour of all men," what an arrogant wresting of Scriptures it is to say He did not provide and offer salvation for all!

(Luke)
Argument presupposes conclusion.

There are actually two possible explanations of this passage. I am going to argue for the one I feel is the more likely, which is that there is a Greek literary device in use here and only believers are in view.

If one rejects this, the other possible interpretation is that the way Christ is the Savior of all isn't by making redemption possible for all (which is false as I will show shortly) but because He secured forebearance (Romans 3:25) which would have been otherwise impossible.

(hananiel)
f. Colossians 1:20 tells us that Christ, "having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself, by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven." Note that that verse speaks, not of all accepting Christ, but of atonement for all, amnesty offered every rebel, a peace treaty prepared to end the war between God and the sinner. If Christ, "through the blood of his cross," intended "to reconcile all things unto himself," as that verse says, who dares put a limit on that atoning blood, so offered for all?

(Luke)
"all kinds of"



Before I continue on to the section on irresistible grace (I wait in eager anticipation...), let me say something about the atonement.

Both hananiel and myself here limit the atonement in some manner. I state that the atonement is limited in scope but effacious in power. In other words, the atonement actually secures salvation for all those for whom it was intended.

hananiel believes that the atonement is unlimited in scope but limited in power, such that it only makes salvation possible.

It should be further noted that the silly argument the author made regarding finite grace v. infinite grace is a bad argument since he also limits the atonement (in fact, he limits the atonement in a much greater fashion than I do!)

Lastly, one more thing regarding what Christ said about the scope of the atonement...

This is the Word of God:
"I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep" (John 10:11, NASB)

"But you do not believe, because you are not of my sheep." (John 10:26, NASB)

The implication made here is clear. The good shepherd (Christ) died for the sheep, a group which does not include everyone (since some of those whom Christ was talking to at the time were excluded)



(hananiel)
Irresistable Grace
All who are elected to be saved will be saved, that they cannot resist this special grace limited to them but will be saved when God calls. It would necessarily follow, first, that those not elected are irresistibly damned, cannot be saved; and, second, that since God works irresistibly to save or damn, Christians cannot affect the salvation or damnation of sinners and need feel no responsibility or burden about it. But this is wrong, unscriptural, and no doubt Satan uses this doctrine of "Irresistible Grace" to lull Christians to disobedience and lack of compassion and burden to get people saved.

(Luke)
Everything he said here is true until the statement "need feel no responsibility...". We should evangelize because God has commanded it. And it is also worth nothing that Calvinism historically has not caused antinomianism as the author suggests.

(hananiel)
a. In II Peter 3:9 we read, "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" Then God desires all men to be saved. And as we showed in section 1, all are enlightened to some degree, and called.

(Luke)
Poor hermeneutics. Only the elect are in view, as is stated IN THIS VERY VERSE.

(hananiel)
So many resist the grace of God.

b. We are commanded to pray for "all men," says I Timothy 2:1, and verses 3 and 4 tell us, "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." We should pray for all men because God our Saviour "will have all men to be saved." So God would have all saved, but some will not be saved. So God's grace may he resisted.

(Luke)
What is most interesting in this citation is what the author ignored; 1 Timothy 2:2--"for kings and all who are in authority". Different types of men are in view here. "All" here means "all kinds of". God accomplishes all He pleases (Isaiah 46:10).

(hananiel)
c. We are told that Jesus wept over Jerusalem and told the sadness of His heart that His love and grace were refused. He said, in Matthew 23:37, "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!" Jesus said, "I would," "and ye would not." So His grace was rejected. It was not irresistible.

(Luke)
He didn't make it irresistible at that point. The doctrine of IG does not say that God's grace is always irresistible, it says that the Holy Spirit can make it so when He desires (and that whenever He doesn't, we will always resist).

(hananiel)
d. In Proverbs 1:24,25, we have a clear statement that God, personified as Wisdom, calls and men refuse. That Scripture says, "Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded; But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof." And the context plainly teaches that the refusal is final and those who so refused God's wisdom and "did not choose the fear of the Lord" went to destruction. Surely, then, people do reject the call of God and resist His grace.

(Luke)
See above.

(hananiel)
e. Paul says in Galatians 2:21, "I do not frustrate the grace of God?" That clearly shows then that those Galatian teachers who teach salvation by the law do frustrate the grace of God. Grace is not irresistible.

And did not you, my reader, long resist God's grace? Only very few were saved the first time they heard the Gospel at the first conviction of sin they felt! Did you not for a time resist God's grace? One who resists one time may resist the last time. And so many continue to resist and are lost forever.

(Luke)
The author is not arguing here against Irresistible Grace at all, but a caricature of it. He should research the subject better.

(hananiel)
f. In fact, the unpardonable sin is surely the sin of a lost man or woman, greatly enlightened and convicted, who comes to a final and irrevocable choice so that God's Spirit gives him up. Genesis 6:3 says, "My spirit shall not always strive with man." He does strive -- resisted to a certain point He sometimes strives no more, so the sin is unpardonable. If the Spirit who strives, then when men resist, may cease forever striving, then grace is not irresistible.

(Luke)
Argument presupposes conclusion...he doesn't know that's what blasphemy is. And again, see above. IG does not teach that grace is always irresistible.

(hananiel)
Hebrew 6:4-6 says, I think, the same thing:

"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers af the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame"

The term "partakers of the Holy Ghost," Dr. Scofleld says, here is "Gr. metochous, going along with." So the Scripture here speaks of one not born of the Spirit but one who is followed, warned, convicted by the Holy Spirit going along with him. He has felt or "tasted" the "powers of the world to come," we are told; has "tasted the good word of God," but refuses Christ, still falls away from that conviction and, after coming to the verge of repentance, turns from it; it is impossible to renew such an one to repentance. So it is with those who, called, convicted, brought to the very crisis of decision, decide finally, eternally against Christ. Oh, every sinner who commits the unpardonable sin does resist the grace of God to the last. So we think did Pharaoh, Judas and, we think, those Pharisees of Matthew 12:24-32 who said Jesus cast out devils by Beelzebub but in heart knew better and blasphemously fought the Holy Spirit who convicted them. God's grace is not irresistible.

(Luke)
For the millionth time, THIS IS NOT WHAT IG TEACHES.

[WooTang]

BTW, perspicuity means plain to understand especially because of clarity and precision of presentation

[Luke]

OK, thanks.

[hananiel]

(Luke)
It should also be noted here that repentance in Scripture is spoken of thrice as something that is granted (Acts 5:31, 11:18,
2 Timothy 2:25). You say that God calls and then we can accept or reject, but in reality, unless God grants repentance, we
will always reject. Those to whom God grants repentance will always accept.

(Hananiel) You are misreading the scripture. In a way yes repentance is granted. You are offered a free tshirt, you have to

(Luke)
Romans 3:22 does not address predestination. Righteousness does come to those who believe. But who believes? Those who were predestined to believe (John 10:27-30).
(Hananiel) Predestination to believe is your interpretation. Show one verse which actually says, predestined to believe. But
I can show you any number which indicates, that WHOEVER believes will not perish. Better still that they have been predestined to have eternal life, conformed to the likeness of the Son.

(LUKE) The beginning of Ephesians 2 is particularly relevant. God "made us alive" while we were dead...it wasn't a
cooperative effort, God did it. Faith is not of ourselves (2:8).
(Hananiel) Yes by dying for our sins while we were dead.


(Luke) As previously mentioned (although you blew it off), the Greek word that we translate "foreknew" (proginosko) does not allow for your interpretation. You say God foreknew a list of who would be saved, and predestined and called those. I say God marked electing love on some, and on that basis predestined and called them. And the word used in Romans 8 here supports my assertion, not yours.I'm not pulling Greek words to sound smart or to confuse you (or others), I'm pulling them because there is an actual difference that needs to be addressed.
(Hananiel) Same thing. Making a list, Marked electing love, marked rejecting hate on the rest. Proginosko is foreknew. who? The people who believed. not the fact of their belief, but the people who believed. I have checked my greek dictionary
before you talked about it, but this still is unnecessary. I am talking about "proginosko" of those who believe. There is no question about knowledge of facts, I am talking about people. (those who believe)


(Luke)
If one is presented with the Gospel and they are not seeking God, they are not going to just up and start seeking God. Romans 3 is a treatise on the condition of man's heart, which doesn't change on the basis of an external Gospel presentation.
And those who do not seek God do not love Him either, because if they loved Him, they would seek and follow Him (John 14:15).
(Hananiel) Romans is a chapter on grace of God. This thesis the archrival of soul winning is not supported by anything you say. Romans is before salvation. John after. Its the During salvation we are talking about.

(Luke)
Did I ever say that "whoever believes will be saved" was a lie? No! I believe wholeheartedly that whoever believes will be saved. The question behind Calvinism is not whether whoever believes will be saved, but rather what causes one to believe and another not to believe.
(Hananiel) You ofcourse know why some churches have more "election" going on than others. They are getting "false" converts by the devil. Anyway, you say that it is an act of God that some cannot believe, I am saying its the condition of their
heart. Or you will agree to my above statement and say that condition of the heart is same for everyone, except we the elect
are given "extra" mercy than others. I like the pious innocence of this thesis, except for the effect it has on soul winning.

You know where you assume this from. Jesus says " No one can come to me except if the father draws him to me" But this is the work of the holy spirit. The holy spirit wont work on those who resist him, who God knows in his foreknowledge. Jesus doesnt do many miracles in a town because of their unbelief. In foreknowledge and knowledge of their state of mind. " If these miracles were done in sodom and gomorrah, they would have repented in sack cloth. Was he talking about predestination, it would be cruel if he was. He was talking about the condition of their hearts.

Can I ask every one on this list to consider how many lost sheep they got back. Thats all that counts really.


(hananiel)
Nor do I believe that when Jesus in his "reformed"(to the Jews) Law says,"The work of God is to believe in His son, he was lying.
(Luke)
Where did Jesus say this?
(Hananiel) John 6:28-29

(Luke)
You are begging the question, was Noah righteous autonomously or was Noah righteous because God regenerated him? The answer must be the latter---if Noah was righteous autonomously then Genesis 6:5 would be a false statement.

And yes, I can state with confidence that Noah was predestined / chosen / appointed on the basis of the fact that he was righteous.

(Hananiel) Unfortunately the Bible is written in everyday language not legalese. Gen 6:5 says : The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.

Which man's? One man's? Some men's? many men's? it depends on context. And in light of Noah we can say all men's except Noah.
Whereas there is no confusion to John 3:16. Acts 10:43. Act 10:43, the key verse of the 10th chapter of acts says: Salvation
is for all men, Jew and Gentile. Why do you think God would have suddenly thought about the gentiles, leaving his once Chosen people, and making a mockery of his saints through evangelism.


(hananiel)
Total Depravity

a. "God... now commandeth all men every where to repent" (Acts 17:30). Can anyone accuse God of commanding people to do what He has made it impossible for them to do?
(Luke)
Why would that be an accusation? It is God's right to command of people what they are incapable of doing. Example: "be perfect" (Matthew 5:48). Unless you believe mankind is autonomously capable of perfection, we must reject that we necessarily have the ability to keep God's commands.
(Hananiel)
Its an exhortation to be perfect. Its good to God's eyes, that you try to be perfect. Its good that all repent. We know that everyone wont. The problem with your interpretation of scripture, is that it takes scripture as it has been expressed for all time, even future and use that in your past. Anyway, if you show me one verse that says, Man is incapable of doing that, then I will agree. It is known as an effect and even a sure thing. But show me its by design, and I will agree. If its not by design, then its by us

(Hananiel)
The apostle said, after hearing of Cornelius' conversion, "Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life" (Acts 11:18). God granted repentance to the Jews; now they see repentance is granted "to the Gentiles" -- not to a few selected individuals, but to the Gentiles, as to Jews.
(Luke)
So is every Gentile saved? Because everyone to whom repentance is granted is obviously saved (Acts 2:38).

(Hananiel) Repentance is granted to all who believe. Belief is not repentance. The message is that salvation is open to all, there is no reason why God would reject gentiles or anyone else. To be sure, repentance has been granted to all. Those who believe in it will be saved. I dont know why he would reject those that are not calvinists for the only fact that they disagree with the doctrine


(hananiel)
c. In John 1:9 we are told about Jesus, "That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." So every man in the world has light from God and from Christ, and so could be saved.
(Luke)Argument presupposes conclusion.

(Hananiel)
Premise 1: true light is christ.
Premise 2: True light lighteth every man that comes into the world
inference 1, from 1 & 2,
true light in christ, lighteth every man that comes.
inference 2: Lighteth every man implies, to show the way, be the way, open to the truth there is.

Conclusion 1: Salvation is available for all men. ( Unless something is preventing the man - disbelief. )
(disbelief is the reason some cant be saved)




(hananiel)
d. In John 12:32,33, Jesus said, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die." When Jesus draws "all men" unto Him, then any one of "all men" could be saved.
(Luke)
There are seven different definitions of the word for "all" (pas) here. At the risk of belaboring this point, I am going to list all seven and different Scriptures where each is used. You will note that in many cases, the word "all" cannot mean "the entire human race" (or "every existing example of") as that would make the cooresponding verse make no sense.

1. the universe as a whole (Acts 17:14)
2. the planet earth (John 13:1, Eph. 1:4)
3. the world-system (John 12:31, 1 John 2:15)
4. the entire human race; every man (Romans 3:19)
5. humanity, excluding believers (John 15:18)
6. Genties in contrast to Jews (Romans 11:12)
7. humanity, considered in the light of God's eschatological redemptive design (John 3:16-17, 6:33)

(This list is originally from Douglas Wilson; Back to the Basics (Hagopian), page 48)

It is your assumption here that John 12 must be referring to definition 4. Definition 6 fits much better in the context of Scripture, since the opening of salvation to Gentiles was a big deal. Also, all who are drawn are saved (John 6:44), so
saying that all are drawn would lead to universalism.

(Hananiel) It is my conclusion that there no reason why I should believe this classification. Or anyreason (except that you have to support your thesis) why ALL is not really all.

Your reason doesnt have enough scriptural support. If this is the way you are going to argue, you can prove basically anything you want. Just make up a nice list.


(hananiel)
e. Romans 1:18-21 says that after the flood, the races became heathen, idolators, barbarians, and are without excuse because the truth of God was manifested unto them. It says:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteonsness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousnes; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened"

(Luke)
This poses no difficulty for the Calvinist position.
(Hananiel) If they were totally depraved, They would be with an excuse.


(hananiel)
f. Psalm 19:1-4 tells us:

"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto

night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all

the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun."

So there is a speech in nature to turn men to seek God. It speaks in all the world and every man is therefore accountable to

God for it.

(Luke)
This passage does not say anywhere that speech in nature "turn[s] men to seek God". Nowhere. And obviously it can't, since nobody seeks God (Romans 3:10-11).

(Hananiel) They are not totally depraved that they cannot turn. It is an effect that they did not. The cause is what we are talking about. Anyway the who gospel is that they are able to now turn to God completely, because having been sanctified, they are able to fellowship with God, who leads the to truth. If the speech in nature was not denied to all men, why has the possibility of salvation alone been denied? Dont you think its a wicked tease to tempt men with what they cannot have?

(hananiel)
g. Romans 2:11-16 says:

"For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be jasitfied. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another,) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel."

Does that not mean that every person in the world is warned from God, either by the Word or by God speaking through the law He has written in their hearts, that is, their consciences?

(Luke)
Which does not presuppose that everyone has the ability to accept the Gospel.
(Hananiel) I dont know what you are saying, I dont presuppose anything that I want to prove.


(hananiel)
And God, in this matter, has "no respect of persons," we are told here, giving every man alike a call to be saved.

(Luke)
Argument presupposes conclusion. In actuality, Romans 2 is a passage about justice...in other words, God cannot be unjust toward one person by sweeping sin under the rug. But the doctrine of election (and irresistible grace) in no way violate God's justice.
Any particular reason why it doesnt violate God's Justice? If he predestines salvation to some and not others? If he gives me cake and gives you dung? In my country its called injustice, especially if I didnt deserve to eat cake anymore than you did. Just in case you jump back to grace/works, its like this, God gave both of us cake, I took it, you didnt. thats fair.


(Luke) The author here is saying that God's being "no respecter of persons" presupposes that He must give all a call to be saved. Of course, if one took this to it's logical conclusion, we would have to say that God must give everyone the same degree of oppertunity (which He obviously does not do).
(Hananiel) 1 Peter 4:6 For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.

(hananiel)
All who seek more light find enough light even as Cornelius did in Acts 10.
(Luke)
He who does evil hates the light (John 3:20).

(Hananiel) And everyone who was predestined to seek light, sought light, and those predestined to seek evil and to be converted got light, and those who were predestined to die, died.
If your know the stock index value tomorrow, you can presume that it was predestinated to reach that value. You confuse foreknowledge with predestination.
You will never get out of that mode of thinking unless you consider the present. tomorrow we all die for we are predestined to die. But we are all not saved because we are not predestined to be saved.
The only predestination thats there is the predestination of saints to be transformed to christlikeness and eternal glory


(hananiel)
Man's sinfulness does not mean some men could not be saved.

(Luke)
It most certainly does! If we are dead in sin (Eph. 2:1), we can do nothing to make ourselves alive. We aren't seeking God (Romans 3:10-11), we have no desire to please God, and indeed, we cannot do so (Romans 8:8). Every intention of our hearts is evil (Genesis 8:21), and we will not come to the light, for fear of being exposed (John 3:20). In this condition, nobody can accept the Gospel because nobody desires the Gospel or God. It is only when God works in us that we will come to the light (John 3:21).

(Hananiel) Your false assumption is that God wont work with a sinful mind, a man in sinful condition. So your conclusion is wrong. This was the work of atonement, that God(The holyspirit) can now come to a sinful man and dwell within him and save him.


(hananiel)
h. We are told that "the gospel of Christ... is the power of God unto salvation" (Rom. 1:16).
(Luke)
For everyone who believes. Important limitation there...

(Hananiel) Yes and the only limitation. There is NO other.

I am continuing my reply in another post because of CGR's character limitation...

(Hananiel) Ill see you there tomorrow. Thanks for responding.

[Luke]

OK, this thread has completely left its intended topic. I'll work at splitting it later....(sorry Ridley)


This poist is also being split in half (again) due to the CGR character limitation.



(Luke)
It should also be noted here that repentance in Scripture is spoken of thrice as something that is granted (Acts 5:31, 11:18,
2 Timothy 2:25). You say that God calls and then we can accept or reject, but in reality, unless God grants repentance, we
will always reject. Those to whom God grants repentance will always accept.

(hananiel)
You are misreading the scripture. In a way yes repentance is granted. You are offered a free tshirt, you have to [accept it]

(Luke)
You're mixing up repentance and salvation. Salvation is offered with the requirement of coming to Christ (repenting, to oversimplify somewhat). But Scripture is teaching here that the repentance itself (not just salvation) is granted. You are not dealing with this distinction.



(Luke)
Romans 3:22 does not address predestination. Righteousness does come to those who believe. But who believes? Those who were predestined to believe (John 10:27-30).

(hananiel)
Predestination to believe is your interpretation. Show one verse which actually says, predestined to believe. But
I can show you any number which indicates, that WHOEVER believes will not perish. Better still that they have been predestined to have eternal life, conformed to the likeness of the Son.

(Luke)
Why must an exact phrase appear in the Bible for the concept to be true? Look at John 10:26-30, Christ is saying that some to not believe because they are not sheep. All who are not sheep reject, all who are sheep believe and follow Christ. This concept of "sheephood" in this passage is the elect (as no other concept fits).

It is also worth noting that both faith and repentance are stated to be gifts of God (Ephesians 2:8-9 for faith). Coming to Christ is something that is granted (John 6:65). This is not just the offer of salvation in view here, the actual response is granted by God (John 6:65) and worked by God (John 3:21).

Finally, it should be noted that "whoever believes" presents no difficulty for my position. I affirm that whoever believes is saved. The question I'm addressing is what causes one to be saved and another not to be saved.



(Luke)
The beginning of Ephesians 2 is particularly relevant. God "made us alive" while we were dead...it wasn't a cooperative effort, God did it. Faith is not of ourselves (2:8).

(hananiel)
Yes by dying for our sins while we were dead.

(Luke)
Ephesians 2 does not talk about Christ dying for our sins while we were still dead (although most certainly He did do this)--Ephesians 2 talks about God's making us alive. Regeneration.



(Luke)
As previously mentioned (although you blew it off), the Greek word that we translate "foreknew" (proginosko) does not allow for your interpretation. You say God foreknew a list of who would be saved, and predestined and called those. I say God marked electing love on some, and on that basis predestined and called them. And the word used in Romans 8 here supports my assertion, not yours.I'm not pulling Greek words to sound smart or to confuse you (or others), I'm pulling them because there is an actual difference that needs to be addressed.

(hananiel)
Same thing. Making a list, Marked electing love, marked rejecting hate on the rest. Proginosko is foreknew. who? The people who believed. not the fact of their belief, but the people who believed. I have checked my greek dictionary
before you talked about it, but this still is unnecessary. I am talking about "proginosko" of those who believe. There is no question about knowledge of facts, I am talking about people. (those who believe)

(Luke)
Except that you are arguing that God refers to a list (that He didn't write) as "foreknowledge". I'm saying that He wrote the list. They are not the same thing.



(Luke)
If one is presented with the Gospel and they are not seeking God, they are not going to just up and start seeking God. Romans 3 is a treatise on the condition of man's heart, which doesn't change on the basis of an external Gospel presentation.
And those who do not seek God do not love Him either, because if they loved Him, they would seek and follow Him (John 14:15).

(hananiel)
Romans is a chapter on grace of God. This thesis the archrival of soul winning is not supported by anything you say. Romans is before salvation. John after. Its the During salvation we are talking about.

(Luke)
Actually, I am making a case for total depravity, which is before salvation. And John 14:15 is still relevant because it says that those who love Christ will obey Him, and Romans 3 (and 8) state that nobody will do this on their own. You cannot deny the obvious implications of these passages.



(Luke)
Did I ever say that "whoever believes will be saved" was a lie? No! I believe wholeheartedly that whoever believes will be saved. The question behind Calvinism is not whether whoever believes will be saved, but rather what causes one to believe and another not to believe.

(hananiel)
You of course know why some churches have more "election" going on than others. They are getting "false" converts by the devil. Anyway, you say that it is an act of God that some cannot believe, I am saying its the condition of their heart. Or you will agree to my above statement and say that condition of the heart is same for everyone, except we the elect are given "extra" mercy than others. I like the pious innocence of this thesis, except for the effect it has on soul winning.

(Luke)
The doctrine of election does not require that every church reel in the same number of converts, so I don't know what the point you were trying to make there was.

I am saying that people cannot believe because of the condition of their hearts, unless God irresistibly draws them. So you could say it was an act of God (in passing over them) but that's by no means the focus.

(hananiel)
Or you will agree to my above statement and say that condition of the heart is same for everyone, except we the elect are given "extra" mercy than others. I like the pious innocence of this thesis, except for the effect it has on soul winning.

(Luke)
This is essentially the teaching of Calvinism. Of course, I have already pointed out that Calvinism does not traditionally breed the belief that evangelism is unnecessary. Most Calvinists see it content to simply evangelize because God commanded it. It is the Arminians who say they must have a satisfactory reason (in their mind) before they are willing to obey what God has commanded.

(hananiel)
You know where you assume this from. Jesus says " No one can come to me except if the father draws him to me" But this is the work of the holy spirit. The holy spirit wont work on those who resist him, who God knows in his foreknowledge. Jesus doesnt do many miracles in a town because of their unbelief. In foreknowledge and knowledge of their state of mind. " If these miracles were done in sodom and gomorrah, they would have repented in sack cloth. Was he talking about predestination, it would be cruel if he was. He was talking about the condition of their hearts.

(Luke)
If Sodom and Gomorrah would have repented had they been given such revelation, then God really didn't skip over them out of foreknowledge of their rejection, now did He?

Your argument is self-refuting and therefore false.

(hananiel)
Can I ask every one on this list to consider how many lost sheep they got back. Thats all that counts really.

(Luke)
Huh?



(hananiel)
Nor do I believe that when Jesus in his "reformed"(to the Jews) Law says,"The work of God is to believe in His son, he was lying.

(Luke)
Where did Jesus say this?

(hananiel)
John 6:28-29

(Luke)
And why does Calvinism make this a lie exactly?



(Luke)
You are begging the question, was Noah righteous autonomously or was Noah righteous because God regenerated him? The answer must be the latter---if Noah was righteous autonomously then Genesis 6:5 would be a false statement.

And yes, I can state with confidence that Noah was predestined / chosen / appointed on the basis of the fact that he was righteous.

(hananiel)
Unfortunately the Bible is written in everyday language not legalese. Gen 6:5 says : The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.

Which man's? One man's? Some men's? many men's? it depends on context. And in light of Noah we can say all men's except Noah.
Whereas there is no confusion to John 3:16. Acts 10:43. Act 10:43, the key verse of the 10th chapter of acts says: Salvation
is for all men, Jew and Gentile. Why do you think God would have suddenly thought about the gentiles, leaving his once Chosen people, and making a mockery of his saints through evangelism.

(Luke)
Acts 10:43 refers to "all kinds of". And Genesis 6:5 does not allow for exceptions, nor does the context of Genesis 6 (or 8:21 for that matter) require it. You are imposing your meaning on the text.



(hananiel)
Total Depravity

a. "God... now commandeth all men every where to repent" (Acts 17:30). Can anyone accuse God of commanding people to do what He has made it impossible for them to do?

(Luke)
Why would that be an accusation? It is God's right to command of people what they are incapable of doing. Example: "be perfect" (Matthew 5:48). Unless you believe mankind is autonomously capable of perfection, we must reject that we necessarily have the ability to keep God's commands.

(hananiel)
Its an exhortation to be perfect. Its good to God's eyes, that you try to be perfect. Its good that all repent. We know that everyone wont. The problem with your interpretation of scripture, is that it takes scripture as it has been expressed for all time, even future and use that in your past. Anyway, if you show me one verse that says, Man is incapable of doing that, then I will agree. It is known as an effect and even a sure thing. But show me its by design, and I will agree. If its not by design, then its by us

(Luke)
Matthew 5 is not talking about the future. It is imposing a complete and normative standard.

And as far as our being incapable, I have shown you verses. Several. Romans 3:10-11. Romans 8:6-8. Genesis 6:5. And the list goes on.

And why does by design matter? If incapability is our condition, and God knows this, then who cares if the Fall had to occur for us to be incapable or not?

(hananiel)
The apostle said, after hearing of Cornelius' conversion, "Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life" (Acts 11:18). God granted repentance to the Jews; now they see repentance is granted "to the Gentiles" -- not to a few selected individuals, but to the Gentiles, as to Jews.

(Luke)
So is every Gentile saved? Because everyone to whom repentance is granted is obviously saved (Acts 2:38).

(hananiel)
Repentance is granted to all who believe. Belief is not repentance. The message is that salvation is open to all, there is no reason why God would reject gentiles or anyone else. To be sure, repentance has been granted to all. Those who believe in it will be saved. I dont know why he would reject those that are not calvinists for the only fact that they disagree with the doctrine

(Luke)
Repentance is granted to all who believe (exclusively) and everyone? Pick one and go with it, and then I'll reply.

[Luke]

(hananiel)
c. In John 1:9 we are told about Jesus, "That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." So every man in the world has light from God and from Christ, and so could be saved.

(Luke)
Argument presupposes conclusion.

(hananiel)
Premise 1: true light is christ.
Premise 2: True light lighteth every man that comes into the world
inference 1, from 1 & 2,
true light in christ, lighteth every man that comes.
inference 2: Lighteth every man implies, to show the way, be the way, open to the truth there is.

Conclusion 1: Salvation is available for all men. ( Unless something is preventing the man - disbelief. )
(disbelief is the reason some cant be saved)

(Luke)
And since when does "ligheth every man" mean "makes salvation achievable for everyone"? There's a gaping difference.



(hananiel)
d. In John 12:32,33, Jesus said, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die." When Jesus draws "all men" unto Him, then any one of "all men" could be saved.

(Luke)
There are seven different definitions of the word for "all" (pas) here. At the risk of belaboring this point, I am going to list all seven and different Scriptures where each is used. You will note that in many cases, the word "all" cannot mean "the entire human race" (or "every existing example of") as that would make the cooresponding verse make no sense.

1. the universe as a whole (Acts 17:14)
2. the planet earth (John 13:1, Eph. 1:4)
3. the world-system (John 12:31, 1 John 2:15)
4. the entire human race; every man (Romans 3:19)
5. humanity, excluding believers (John 15:18)
6. Genties in contrast to Jews (Romans 11:12)
7. humanity, considered in the light of God's eschatological redemptive design (John 3:16-17, 6:33)

(This list is originally from Douglas Wilson; Back to the Basics (Hagopian), page 48)

It is your assumption here that John 12 must be referring to definition 4. Definition 6 fits much better in the context of Scripture, since the opening of salvation to Gentiles was a big deal. Also, all who are drawn are saved (John 6:44), so
saying that all are drawn would lead to universalism.

(hananiel)
It is my conclusion that there no reason why I should believe this classification. Or anyreason (except that you have to support your thesis) why ALL is not really all.

Your reason doesnt have enough scriptural support. If this is the way you are going to argue, you can prove basically anything you want. Just make up a nice list.

(Luke)
My reason has enormous Scriptural support. I basically have proven that taking your interpretation makes the verse nonsense because it becomes universalism. Not to mention that taking your interpretaiton pits this verse against all sorts of other passages that I've been quoting throughout this debate (most of which you just say "you are misreading" with no good reason).

Methinks the pot is calling the kettle black (although the actual color of the kettle is this particular case is not black).

(hananiel)
e. Romans 1:18-21 says that after the flood, the races became heathen, idolators, barbarians, and are without excuse because the truth of God was manifested unto them. It says:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteonsness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousnes; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened"

(Luke)
This poses no difficulty for the Calvinist position.

(hananiel)
If they were totally depraved, They would be with an excuse.

(Luke)
No they wouldn't. They still sinned (duh!).



(hananiel)
f. Psalm 19:1-4 tells us:

"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto

night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all

the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun."

So there is a speech in nature to turn men to seek God. It speaks in all the world and every man is therefore accountable to

God for it.

(Luke)
This passage does not say anywhere that speech in nature "turn[s] men to seek God". Nowhere. And obviously it can't, since nobody seeks God (Romans 3:10-11).

(hananiel)
They are not totally depraved that they cannot turn. It is an effect that they did not. The cause is what we are talking about. Anyway the who gospel is that they are able to now turn to God completely, because having been sanctified, they are able to fellowship with God, who leads the to truth. If the speech in nature was not denied to all men, why has the possibility of salvation alone been denied? Dont you think its a wicked tease to tempt men with what they cannot have?

(Luke)
No. Because the reason they can't have it is because they reject it. And none of the rest of your argument makes any sense.



(hananiel)
g. Romans 2:11-16 says:

"For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be jasitfied. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another,) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel."

Does that not mean that every person in the world is warned from God, either by the Word or by God speaking through the law He has written in their hearts, that is, their consciences?

(Luke)
Which does not presuppose that everyone has the ability to accept the Gospel.

(hananiel)
I dont know what you are saying, I dont presuppose anything that I want to prove.

(Luke)
Change "presuppose" to "require" (although I would certainly disagree with the above statement).



(hananiel)
And God, in this matter, has "no respect of persons," we are told here, giving every man alike a call to be saved.

(Luke)
Argument presupposes conclusion. In actuality, Romans 2 is a passage about justice...in other words, God cannot be unjust toward one person by sweeping sin under the rug. But the doctrine of election (and irresistible grace) in no way violate God's justice.

(hananiel)
Any particular reason why it doesnt violate God's Justice? If he predestines salvation to some and not others? If he gives me cake and gives you dung? In my country its called injustice, especially if I didnt deserve to eat cake anymore than you did. Just in case you jump back to grace/works, its like this, God gave both of us cake, I took it, you didnt. thats fair.

(Luke)
So if I go and give a random person on the street a cake, I'm now legally required to give everyone in the entire United States a cake? No, of course not.

You're mixing up "fairness" and "justice". God isn't necessarily fair.



(Luke)
The author here is saying that God's being "no respecter of persons" presupposes that He must give all a call to be saved. Of course, if one took this to it's logical conclusion, we would have to say that God must give everyone the same degree of oppertunity (which He obviously does not do).

(hananiel)
1 Peter 4:6 For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.

(Luke)
That still doesn't mean everyone has the same degree of oppertunity. That verse doesn't address what I said.



(hananiel)
All who seek more light find enough light even as Cornelius did in Acts 10.

(Luke)
He who does evil hates the light (John 3:20).

(hananiel)
And everyone who was predestined to seek light, sought light

(Luke)
Basically. John 3:21 (note that their coming to the light is worked by God).

(hananiel)
and those predestined to seek evil and to be converted got light,

(Luke)
Nobody is in this category.

(hananiel)
and those who were predestined to die, died.

(Luke)
Everyone dies. And it is appointed when that will occur.

(hananiel)
You confuse foreknowledge with predestination.

(Luke)
I still distinguish them, just not the same way you do because I have a more Biblical understanding of foreknowledge. Predestination based on your type of foreknowledge is not predestination at all.

(hananiel)
You will never get out of that mode of thinking unless you consider the present. tomorrow we all die for we are predestined to die. But we are all not saved because we are not predestined to be saved.
The only predestination thats there is the predestination of saints to be transformed to christlikeness and eternal glory

(Luke)
Romans 8:29-30 speaks of a predestination to salvation. Ephesians 1:4 is actually speaking of this too, but to prove this would be a very complicated argument going way into the Greek that I doubt either of us wants to go through.



(hananiel)
Man's sinfulness does not mean some men could not be saved.

(Luke)
It most certainly does! If we are dead in sin (Eph. 2:1), we can do nothing to make ourselves alive. We aren't seeking God (Romans 3:10-11), we have no desire to please God, and indeed, we cannot do so (Romans 8:8). Every intention of our hearts is evil (Genesis 8:21), and we will not come to the light, for fear of being exposed (John 3:20). In this condition, nobody can accept the Gospel because nobody desires the Gospel or God. It is only when God works in us that we will come to the light (John 3:21).

(hananiel)
Your false assumption is that God wont work with a sinful mind, a man in sinful condition. So your conclusion is wrong. This was the work of atonement, that God(The holyspirit) can now come to a sinful man and dwell within him and save him.

(Luke)
Of course God works in (not "with") sinful minds. God regenerates people's minds and hearts, making them desire Him and desire Christ. But this does not presuppose that God works in every sinful mind (your view requires that God works in every sinful mind in an incomplete manner, and we finish the job. My view states that God works in some sinful minds in a complete manner, transforming them and making them alive to righteousness).



(hananiel)
h. We are told that "the gospel of Christ... is the power of God unto salvation" (Rom. 1:16).

(Luke)
For everyone who believes. Important limitation there...

(hananiel)
Yes and the only limitation. There is NO other.

(Luke)
Only the sheep believe (John 10:26-27)

For the umpteeth time, Calvinism addresses why some believe and others don't, not what happens to those who believe.

[hananiel]

(hananiel)
And would you say, like the neo-orthodox teachers who do not accept the Bible as objectively the Word of God, that it becomes the Word of God to individuals only as it affects them?

(Luke)
No, it is the Word of God regardless, they just don't listen to it. He author is attempting guilt by association here.

(Hananiel) The guilt is because of the same action as what you are committing. Its not by association. If it was said, Calvinists are going with neo-orthodox christians, so their(calvinist's) doctrine is wrong, then it would be.

So it is the word of God regard less. You dont have to impose greek literary devices, changed meaning of words from some propoganda to explain scripture.


(hananiel)
The Word of God itself has supernatural power to affect the lost sinner, and it needs only to be "mixed with faith" (Heb. 4:9.) to save the sinner.
(Luke) "There remains a Sabbath rest of the people of God" (Hebrews 4:9)

(Hananiel) sorry 12. For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Again the missing ingredient is only faith.

Limited Atonement

Christ did not die for all men, made no provision for them so they would possibly be saved. It really claims that God did not love all men enough to have Christ die for all, that His grace is limited, so is finite instead of infinite. But this is contradicted by many plain Scriptures.

a. John 3:16 says that "God so loved THE WORLD, that he gave his only begotten Son" -- that it was so that "whosoever" could believe on Him and be saved. No limited love or atonement in John 3:16!

(Luke)
God's loving the world does not presuppose that He will save everyone in it.
He does imply wishing every one to it. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. He cannot give the free gift of salvation to those who refuse to take it.

Like you said, I understand this is either to those predestined to be saved, or those already saved or he was sleeping while he said it or used a greek literary device.

(hananiel)
b. In John 1:29 we read the inspired statenent of John the baptist about Jesus, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world," Since Christ atoned for "the sin of the world," not just part of the sin of the world, it could not be a limited atonement.

(Luke)
We are begging the question here...if the sins of everyone in the world is taken away, then why are not all saved? Everyone's sin is gone...there is no sin left to condemn anyone. "The world" (kosmos) does not mean every single person in this passage. It means Jews plus Gentiles. Interpreting it your way leads to universalism.

(hananiel) It means Jews and Gentiles. Thats everyone even by your definition. The sin of the world has been taken away. Sin taken away doesnt imply saved. All who believe will be saved. Not all whose sin has been paid for. All are not saved because they continue, of their free will to submit to satans viles. Those who respond to God are delivered.

(hananiel)
c. First John 2:2 plainly says, "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world." No limited atonement there!

(Luke)
Same thing. World means Gentiles plus Jews.While kosmos has multiple definitions (six total), the word "propitiation" (hilasmos) as only one definition--turning away God's wrath from the object.
So 1 John 2:2 says: "And he turned away God's wrath for us, and not for us only, but also for the whole world" If "whole world" here means every single person, everyone is saved. Wrong.

(Hanaiel) Again, every person is not saved. You scream universalism because, you assume propitiation for all sins, automatically implies reconciliation between man and God. Man has to believe, He has to take that free gift of salvation.

It clearly, without doubt says ALL. There were two classifications of people in that time (and biblically today). Jews and Gentiles. It doesnt mean no asians, caucasians, africans or no anybody. It is ALL. For everyone.And the only classification is those who believe.


(hananiel)
d. Romans 5:20 says, "Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound." Does not that mean God has grace for all the sin in the world, and even a great surplus? So the total number of people who will ever be born on the earth is a finite counted number that God knows. But the grace of God is infinite, much more than for those who will be saved, even much more than for all the sins of all the people in the world, so says the plain Word of God. Romans 5:20 leaves no limit on the atonement

(Luke)
That grace is infinite does not presuppose that the atonement is unlimited in scope.

(Hananiel) I suppose to you africa can be both south and not south of europe. Like I said, If your deny logic, I cannot have debate. You change meanings of words, where it is all, its not all. Where it says one, its the opposite to you. What can I say.

(hananiel)
e. First Timothy 4:10 tells of "the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." To those who believe, Christ is a special, personal, accepted Saviour. But to all who have not believed He is potentially and intentionally a Saviour. When God says in the Bible that He has provided a "Saviour of all men," what an arrogant wresting of Scriptures it is to say He did not provide and offer salvation for all!

(Luke)
Argument presupposes conclusion.

There are actually two possible explanations of this passage. I am going to argue for the one I feel is the more likely, which is that there is a Greek literary device in use here and only believers are in view.

If one rejects this, the other possible interpretation is that the way Christ is the Savior of all isn't by making redemption possible for all (which is false as I will show shortly) but because He secured forebearance (Romans 3:25) which would have been otherwise impossible.

(Hananiel) The premise is the conclusion.Its God word. I am not debating if God's word is true. There is one interpretation. If you do not use your greek devices, and frustrate your intelligence by arguing against what the word of God is saying.

Where it says all - there it means those predestined to be saved. Ok the strength of the argument noted.

But, what makes you think forebearance was impossible without propitiation. Is that a limitation of God. I can understand the Justice of God. He statuted that the wages of sin is death. And he met the cost. What about his forebearance. What do you guys worship??
God's forbearance needed Propitiation. You are maligning the very nature of God.


(hananiel)
f. Colossians 1:20 tells us that Christ, "having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself, by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven." Note that that verse speaks, not of all accepting Christ, but of atonement for all, amnesty offered every rebel, peace treaty prepared to end the war between God and the sinner. If Christ, "through the blood of his cross," intended "to reconcile all things unto himself," as that verse says, who dares put a limit on that atoning blood, so offered for all?
(Luke)
"all kinds of"
(Hananiel) sure! There is an interesting discussion going on in division of church thread about faith. You'll see what you are doing if you are not doing on purpose

(Luke) Both hananiel and myself here limit the atonement in some manner. I state that the atonement is limited in scope but effacious in power. In other words, the atonement actually secures salvation for all those for whom it was intended.
hananiel believes that the atonement is unlimited in scope but limited in power, such that it only makes salvation possible.

(Hananiel) Misrepresention. Unlimited in scope and power. The believer accepts the gift. The unbeliever tramples it. The power of salvation was available but unused, wasted in some.

(Luke) It should be further noted that the silly argument the author made regarding finite grace v. infinite grace is a bad argument since he also limits the atonement (in fact, he limits the atonement in a much greater fashion than I do!)
(Hananiel) Vague generalities, and effected confidence, that warns me there is a major problem with this section. And you havent show how i limited any atonement

(Luke) Lastly, one more thing regarding what Christ said about the scope of the atonement...
This is the Word of God:
"I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep" (John 10:11, NASB)
"But you do not believe, because you are not of my sheep." (John 10:26, NASB)
The implication made here is clear. The good shepherd (Christ) died for the sheep, a group which does not include everyone (since some of those whom Christ was talking to at the time were excluded)

(Hananiel) "But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him." Down the passage He was ofcourse mocking at them, because of their unbelief. How unchrist like. your verse talks about the work of the Holy Spirit in men, drawing them to christ. So indeed unless God draws them no one can be saved. But they havent been predestined to be saved like you would argue. You are sure about the different meaning of ALL that have to be assigned to make Calvinism come true, but you have no problem with the logical incongruities it causes

(hananiel)
Irresistable Grace

All who are elected to be saved will be saved, that they cannot resist this special grace limited to them but will be saved when God calls. It would necessarily follow, first, that those not elected are irresistibly ****ed, cannot be saved; and, second, that since God works irresistibly to save or ****, Christians cannot affect the salvation or ****ation of sinners and need feel no responsibility or burden about it. But this is wrong, unscriptural, and no doubt Satan uses this doctrine of "Irresistible Grace" to lull Christians to disobedience and lack of compassion and burden to get people saved.
(Luke)
Everything he said here is true until the statement "need feel no responsibility...". We should evangelize because God has commanded it. And it is also worth nothing that Calvinism historically has not caused antinomianism as the author suggests.

(Hananiel) And can I ask ( indeed I am afraid ) Why you feel a responsibility for something you have no chance of effecting the outcome of? And what do you when you go evangelising? Do you preach or go fishing. Is there any reason why one is better than the other, since, your acts have no effect on being irresistably ****ed? Your God is commanding you to do something that has no effect?

Isnt it what it means to let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men


(hananiel)
a. In II Peter 3:9 we read, "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" Then God desires all men to be saved. And as we showed in section 1, all are enlightened to some degree, and called.
(Luke)
Poor hermeneutics. Only the elect are in view, as is stated IN THIS VERY VERSE.

Yes I understand, the golden rule, that says, ALL is the ELECT. No, in EVERY verse that has all,except the ****ation verses. Again its by your preference, you can all them Calvinistic Hermenuetics if it pleases you. But that dont change the truth my friend. The Bible says what it means, so you are depriving of the power of God by saying, the sword of the Lord, needs hermenuetics to understand what is being said.

There is a lady who probably wasnt educated beyond 9th grade. If you could only see how beautifully she explains scripture and understands, you will know as I did, that God did indeed choose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise.


(hananiel)
So many resist the grace of God.
b. We are commanded to pray for "all men," says I Timothy 2:1, and verses 3 and 4 tell us, "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." We should pray for all men because God our Saviour "will have all men to be saved." So God would have all saved, but some will not be saved. So God's grace may he resisted.

(Luke)
What is most interesting in this citation is what the author ignored; 1 Timothy 2:2--"for kings and all who are in authority". Different types of men are in view here. "All" here means "all kinds of". God accomplishes all He pleases (Isaiah 46:10).

I already explained to you Isaiah 46:10. And why you have to take that obscure scripture that was not even part of the Gospel, the good news, to say what you want to make it say. I explained why if love was forced, it was no love at all. Indeed if you love, you will know that emotion, better than a million greek or hebrew words.

Yes I understand, the golden rule, that says, ALL is the ELECT.



(hananiel)
c. We are told that Jesus wept over Jerusalem and told the sadness of His heart that His love and grace were refused. He said, in Matthew 23:37, "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!" Jesus said, "I would," "and ye would not." So His grace was rejected. It was not irresistible.

(Luke)
He didn't make it irresistible at that point. The doctrine of IG does not say that God's grace is always irresistible, it says that the Holy Spirit can make it so when He desires (and that whenever He doesn't, we will always resist).

(Hananiel) You yourselves agreed to the definition of IG. You made no switch clause, that you will turn it off when it pleases you. Perhaps you didnt see this argument, but if you were saying the truth and if your truth was more elegant it wont need so much twisting.

This is what you said :
Everything he said here is true until the statement "need feel no responsibility...".

Now I understand that big preface, and "Now the easy part" hemming and hawing. You need to be honest. Seek the truth and you will find it.


(hananiel)
d. In Proverbs 1:24,25, we have a clear statement that God, personified as Wisdom, calls and men refuse. That Scripture says, "Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded; But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof." And the context plainly teaches that the refusal is final and those who so refused
God's wisdom and "did not choose the fear of the Lord" went to destruction. Surely, then, people do reject the call of God and resist His grace.
(Luke)
See above.
same here

(hananiel)
e. Paul says in Galatians 2:21, "I do not frustrate the grace of God?" That clearly shows then that those Galatian teachers who teach salvation by the law do frustrate the grace of God. Grace is not irresistible.

And did not you, my reader, long resist God's grace? Only very few were saved the first time they heard the Gospel at the first conviction of sin they felt! Did you not for a time resist God's grace? One who resists one time may resist the last time. And so many continue to resist and are lost forever.

(Luke)
The author is not arguing here against Irresistible Grace at all,
but a caricature of it. He should research the subject better.

(Hananiel) It reflects accurately the agreed definition. You should make objection there. May be in the next post you will refine IG (till it dodges all these arguments given). Hopefully when we are done, you will change it enough so we all will see that its not true. Besides, Its a true picture as far as I am concerned. I consistently resisted the Grace of God, till one day I surrendered.

(hananiel)
f. In fact, the unpardonable sin is surely the sin of a lost man or woman, greatly enlightened and convicted, who comes to a final and irrevocable choice so that God's Spirit gives him up. Genesis 6:3 says, "My spirit shall not always strive with man." He does strive -- resisted to a certain point He sometimes strives no more, so the sin is unpardonable. If the Spirit who strives, then when men resist, may cease forever striving, then grace is not irresistible.
(Luke)
Argument presupposes conclusion...he doesn't know that's what blasphemy is. And again, see above. IG does not teach that
grace is always irresistible.
(Hananiel)
Blasphemy is another proof for irresistability of Grace. But I suppose you know what the author knows or doesnt. Anyway

Do I need a better verdict. Out of your own mouth. If IRRESISTABLE GRACE does not teach that GRACE is IRRESISTABLE may be you should call it RESISTABLE GRACE. wait that wont fit, TULRP?

(hananiel)
Hebrew 6:4-6 says, I think, the same thing:
"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame" The term "partakers of the Holy Ghost," Dr. Scofleld says, here is "Gr. metochous, going along with." So the Scripture here speaks of one not born of the Spirit but one who is followed, warned, convicted by the Holy Spirit going along with him. He has felt or "tasted" the "powers of the world to come," we are told; has "tasted the good word of God," but refuses Christ, still falls away from that conviction and, after coming to the verge of repentance, turns from it; it is impossible to renew such an one to repentance. So it is with those who, called, convicted, brought to the very crisis of decision, decide finally, eternally against Christ. Oh, every sinner who commits the unpardonable sin does resist the grace of God to the last. So we think did Pharaoh, Judas and, we think, those Pharisees of Matthew 12:24-32 who said Jesus cast out devils by Beelzebub but in heart knew better and blasphemously fought the Holy Spirit who convicted them. God's grace is not irresistible.
(Luke)
For the millionth time, THIS IS NOT WHAT IG TEACHES.
(Hananiel) Twice Out of your own mouth. If IRRESISTABLE GRACE does not teach that GRACE is IRRESISTABLE may be you should call it RESISTABLE GRACE.

So we can safely conclude, that Calvinism or to be accurate Hyper-calvinism is unbiblical. I couldnt care less how people understand predestination. Who choose first as long as you see and be
1 grateful for the grace of God.
2. Dont give up on a sinner no matter how depraved you may think he is.
3. be careful of greiving the holy spirit

So if you are saved, go shout out the Good news from the roof tops, in your work places, in playground, That Jesus christ has died for you, you, you. And above all be an example for christ, being transformed in His likeness.
-Hananiel

[hananiel]

I think the defense I gave will keep the honest seeker from going astray.

You can draw a horse to water.