Posted on 05/09/2002 6:11:08 AM PDT by RnMomof7
Be faithful this day!
Thanks for starting my day in the right direction. 8~)
The life of the Christian should be a magnet to draw people to Christ. ..Spurgeon
Kind of conflicts somewhat with the self justified "offensiveness" of what is preached to us Arminian (or other) "students" around here.
Morning all
God's abundant blessings on everyone's life . . . He loves us as wide as "East meets West"
You're the best! 'cause it's CHRIST IN YOU! The hope of glory.
<><
1st mail
**** "Upon His breastplate he is now bearing our names; and in His authoritative pleadings at the throne He remembers our persons and pleads our cause." ****
I think you need to make a correction on the thread and flag everyone you can.
You emphasized "NOW bearing our names." The Bible's emphasis is DIFFERENT.
Look at Exodus 28, especially verses 12, 28, 29, and 30. (See if you can figure out what I am driving at.)
Particular redemption cheers,
========================================================
I requested clarification and this is the response
My point is that the names of the chosen people were on the Lord's shoulders and their precious souls were on His heart **when He MADE ATONEMENT.** Our High Priest was not even ALLOWED to make a strictly vague, general atonement. This is clearly presented in the typology of the "chosen people."
Exodus 28:12 and 28:28-30 required that the High Priest of the OT make an atonement which was absolutely specific to the "chosen people." The OT's High Priest was not even **allowed** to go into the Holiest of Holies to present the meritorious blood (and thereby consummate the Atonement) unless he was **wearing** the epaulets with the specific names and the precious stones!
When you see that the Church is the fulfillment of the OT's chosen people idea (symbolized by the Jews as a race), the doctrine of particular redemption (limited atonement) is a slam dunk. The High Priest did NOT atone for the sins of the non-chosen. AT ALL. Then where does the free offer of the gospel fit in?
It consists in the fact of the mystery which the secret will of God entails in tension with the revealed will of God. When the High Priest was officiating at the brazen altar--for all to behold--he was wearing only a plain tunic, not the special ephod or breastpiece. But this non-specific garb merely represents the revealed will of God in the free offer of the gospel. Ah, but there is more to the gospel of the cross than the free offer!
This is what the Calvinist has noticed and what the Arminian simply refuses to notice!
What I mean is that the public ritual at the brazen altar was only the first part of a ritual involving three altars, the other two of which were not on public display!
That is the Calvinist's point.
=========================================================
Now of course I agree ...whatcha think??
As I always said, a Calvinist to be a soul-winner has to talk like an Arminian. Here is Spurgeon talking about our lives drawing someone to God, when it is (according to Calvinism) only God that can do that!
That's pretty weak FTD; no calvinist here has alluded that we cannot be tools in the Lord's hands. You want it to be you, while Calvinists admit that it is the Lord.
According to Calvinism nothing can draw a dead man anywhere! You guys love to have it both ways. How can a dead man be drawn anywhere? God has to first regenerate them! Isn't that you all teach! No unregenerate man can desire or seek God-period.
Spurgeon wons souls because he presented the Gospel as an appeal to the sinner to make a decision, not to wait for God to regenerate him.
wait a minute, wait a minute ! - Armommy said A thinking reprobate can read and understand the principles. He can even understand what they mean.
But scripture tells us only a believer can understand scripture. It begs, if a "thinking reprobate" can "understand" the calvinist "principle", then is it actually scriptural, or a man made construct?
Either (yes it is spelled that way) Armommy is right and the Calvinists wrong or (in my best Monty Python voice) shes "a witch" ;) - and how do we know shes a witch? Shes turned me into a newt when she questioned my salvation.
I got better.
But either the calvin position floats, or Armommys position floats (like a wooden "tree stump") as one of them is heretical. What else also floats besides small pebbles, and strawberries.
A duck you say.
Precisely !
- if she weighs the same as a duck, then shes a heretic to Christs teaching (at least in the calvinist eye)
We dub you "Armomian" :-)
has anyone seen my paxil?
Bad will be the day for every man when he becomes absolutely contented with the life he is leading, with the thoughts he is thinking, with the deeds he is doing; when there is not forever beating at the doors of his soul some great desire to do something larger, which he knows that he was meant and made to do because he is still, in spite of all, the child of God.
... Phillips Brooks (1835-1893)
You really don't 'get it' do you?
We mortals have no way to know who is elect and who is not, thus your post is nonsense. - The Lord will do as he will, and if we are his tools, so be it.
The mortal mind cannot know the nature of God; you presume far too much. - Take his word at it's literal face value and you cannot go wrong.
Calvinism does not teach that unregenerate man can do anything until God regenerates him first. So, now you want to run from that dogma when it is inconvenient.
God can also allow a spiritual dead man to ask the question Sirs, what must I do to be saved
and then give the simple, straight forward answer believe in the Lord Jesus Christ
But it is the Calvinsts who deny that (1) the man actually had to do something (2) that faith preceeds regeneration. This is all based on your notion of Total inability. Asserting that a dead man cannot do anything regarding the Gospel. Now, however Spurgeon is telling us that same dead man can be now be drawn prior to regeneration.
No, I get it very well, Calvinism is pure mysticism based on philosophical speculation.
The mortal mind cannot know the nature of God; you presume far too much. - Take his word at it's literal face value and you cannot go wrong.
I do take his word at face value
Sirs, what must I do to be saved? Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved and thy household. (Acts.16:31)I see someone asking what he must do and then being told what he must do -believe.
Now, what part of that Scripture teaches regeneration preceeds faith? In fact, which Scripture teaches that? Only your own speculations on the nature of spiritual death lead you to conclude that. You do not get it from any clear statement from scripture.
It is Calvinism that presumes too much
I could tell you lost it:>))))
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.