Posted on 05/07/2002 10:20:28 AM PDT by CCWoody
The Father imposed His wrath due unto, and the Son underwent punishment for, either:
In which case it may be said:
You answer, "Because of unbelief."
I ask, Is this unbelief a sin, or is it not? If it be, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or He did not. If He did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which He died? If He did not, He did not die for all their sins!"
Not sure I follow your thinking. The death of Christ described in Isaiah 53, which you acknowledge gives support to the penal theory, is a death for Jews and Gentiles.
What I mean is, Is. 53 lends support to both governmental and penal theory, and that's to be expected, since both theories' main appeal is to a judicial system.
BTW, do you accept or reject forensic justification (i.e. we are declared righteous based on the work of Christ on the cross for us)? Do you believe in the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the account of those who are justified? Finney denies both. Curious as to where you come out on these.
I don't know that I understand the concept of "forensic justification" enough to say, but I do believe that we are made righteous based on what Christ suffered on the cross. That may or may not be what forensic righteousness means to you, I'm not sure. As to the second, imputed righteousness. No. Not in the sense most Calvinists use it ("his righteousness is imputed," that is, transferred, "to us as our own"). I don't really attach theological significance to the word "impute" in the English versions, but I do understand it to mean "reckon" or "count" in the Greek, not in the character-transfer sense, but in the sense that declares that it is the "instrumental cause." In other words, rather than saying that "his righteousness is imputed to us as our own," I follow the thinking that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness"--that is, Abraham's belief was the condition which God set for a declaration from God that he was righteous.
Biblical Theology's Jeff Paton has an article that deals with this stuff a bit. I linked directly to it; it's called "Imputation and the Arminian Mind."
I didn't do anything different, the HTML is the same as always. I wonder if your appropriation of "my" blue somehow messed my colors up?!?
;>)
Are you folks really sure that you want this to say what you think it does?
Looks to me that it says that it is impossible to renew them again. Isn't it your theology that teaches that saved people can fall back into being unsaved? If so, then it looks as if they would only get one shot, and that it is impossible to be re-saved.
Instead of teaching what you think it does, this passage, in reality, is a strong repudiation of your belief. The author of Hebrews is telling us how ludicrous it is for one to believe that they can be saved, unsaved, resaved, unsaved, resaved, etc. This passage, in fact, strongly supports the perseverence and preservation of the saints.
Actually no. Those were the days when I was taught (and believed) that dancing was "of the devil."
But I had a lime green leisure suit.
Oh sure, always blame the Arminians...
And you know you will find disagreement among Arminians, even on this thread regarding the perserverance of the saints. But, the passage seems to indicate that the enlightened can fall away.
From what I believe you guys are saying only the regenerate would be considered "enlightened" because that implies understanding the spiritual things. But it seems to conflict with the notion that while the regenerate can sin (displease God), ultimately the regenerate cannot reject God.
However, it says, quite clearly, that if they fall it is impossible for them to be restored. In other words, once un-saved, always un-saved. As a result, all non-Calvinists had better hope that they hold on real tight and never lose their grip, because once they slip, they can never be restored.
(The operative word in the passage is "if". It does not denote a reality, but demonstrates a truism, as in "If I drive my car at a bridge embankment at 140 miles an hour, I will die". I have no intention of doing so, and God has no intention of letting go of His people. He won't lose a single one.)
So, how do you reconcile that with what you said here?
CORIN: "Is there a possiblity that someone who is "regenerated" will not become "glorified?""
JERRY: "Absolutely not."
This verse poses problems for you, not me. It specifically states that "if" they fall away they can never be restored. You are the one who states that they can fall away (not me), thus you must contend with the fact that "once un-saved, always un-saved".
Jerry, I asked you if there was a "possibility" for the unregenerate to not choose God. In other words, "if" it could happen. You said, "absolutely not."
You're not going to drive off the cliff. But you could and people do all the time.
If only the elect are regenerated (enlightened). And there is "absolutely" no possibility for the regenerate to "not choose God," then, even if it's not going to happen, how is there an "if?"
(Sorry. I should not have used the word 'follower'. It implies freewill.)
I would say yes. I believe the Calvinists would say no. But if I'm wrong, I'm sure they'll offer some correction.
If a person sins (James and others address that) and keeps drifting away - that is backsliding. He can 'come to his senses' and return to the Father.
Falling away is a renunciation of Christ and all that He has done for the person.
Oh, YOU don't LIKE this idea? The Jews were TOLD to get inside, with the blood over the door, or else! Do you not LIKE that idea either?
We have the advantage of looking backward at the FACT of the death of the first born and SEEING that it was indeed true. Now WE have to make a choice: is this similar sounding verse in Hebrews true or not?
I take it as true - a warning. My skydiving instructor tells me that my 'chute WILL hold me, keep me from falling.
If, halfway down, I decide that it won't, it restrains me too much when I want to flap my arms...... guess what.........
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.