God's Willingness and Man's unwillingness

MiddleTown Bible church ^ | Unknown | Unknown

[xzins]

I'm as close to the "P" as one can get without being there. The only modification I make is that "unbelievers" will not be in heaven....to include those who made a true recantation of the faith.

[George W. Bush]

Serious question...are you also zadok; reason you answered the question???

No. I was interested in the remarks and butted in. I have no alternate identities. My GWB is notorious well-established.

What do you know of the new RLC forum? Who's the RLC?

Is this like "What's the frequency, Kenneth?". I don't know anything about the RLC.

I just don't have any questions anymore, GW. When the "I" fell, it was obvious that the "U" was untenable.

Translation: you know you have no rational answers and have therefore decided to declare victory and run away.

[xzins]

Are livers regularly in good shape after accident, illness, etc? Or are good livers extremely rare....as are good matches.

Her cirrhosis (sp) is bad. I think she'll die soon.

[drstevej]

***The only modification I make is that "unbelievers" will not be in heaven....to include those who made a true recantation of the faith.***

Then some who are justified are not glorified? Or is justification reversible? Is regeneration reversible?

[xzins]

Serious question...are you also zadok; reason you answered the question??? No. I was interested in the remarks and butted in. I have no alternate identities. My GWB is notorious well-established. What do you know of the new RLC forum? Who's the RLC? Is this like "What's the frequency, Kenneth?". I don't know anything about the RLC. I just don't have any questions anymore, GW. When the "I" fell, it was obvious that the "U" was untenable. Translation: you know you have no rational answers and have therefore decided to declare victory and run away.

Seriously, GW. The "I" is untenable. The truth cannot include both a biblical "U" and a biblical "R." In that case you'd have a person chosen to be saved who had the ability to resist. That would equal persons decreed to be in heaven who on being born then rejected/resisted salvation. You would have unbelievers in heaven. It's untenable.

All along the key has been the "I." I'm surprised I didn't see it sooner.

The "L" is also important. All unlimited atonement scriptural support is additionally support for "R" instead of "I."

[drstevej]

I'm outta here for the night

[xzins]

Nope. I assume they're just cast into hell according to the same process God will use with the heaven-born Satan.

[drstevej]

So justified people may be in Hell?

[George W. Bush]

My cousin's friend is awaiting a liver transplant. What are the chances?

That's interesting. Since we know that God is fully capable of performing unlimited miracles and so could heal her liver, then it could be properly said that God's miraculous healing of diseased livers is sufficent for all, effective only for those He actually does heal. So, would the potential miracle healing be of any effect?

So it is with the notion of unlimited or universal atonement. Unless that atonement gets you into heaven, then, practically speaking, Christ does not exist for you. If He atoned for your sins, you will go to heaven. If you go to hell, He couldn't have atoned for your sins.

A possible miracle is no miracle at all if you die from a diseased liver. A possible atonement is no atonement at all when you face an eternity in the lake of fire.

You've spent many words to accuse us of having a philosophical system. In fact, it is you who has a philophical system which has a primary purpose:

It exonerates God from being considered "unfair" to mankind by using free will to indict each individual man (instead of embracing orthodox teaching that we are born under the curse of Adam as taught in scripture).

God does not need your theological exoneration because His justice is perfect.

Potter. Clay.
Any questions?

[xzins]

There's the rub, isn't it? That's why I'm so close to a "P." I have to come up with a decision on whether I think a true recantation of the faith is possible. Or if it's actually evidence that true faith never was present.

If true faith can be recanted, then it is also must be true that that unbeliever will not be in heaven because no unbeliever will be in heaven.

If true faith can be recanted, then it must be true that one can willingly abdicate their justification, mustn't it? The only verse I can think of that would apply would be hebrews "crucify to themselves the son of god afresh....no more sacrifice for sin."

[George W. Bush]

All along the key has been the "I." I'm surprised I didn't see it sooner.

Well, people who have no acquaintance of the 'I' really can't believe in it. I didn't until it happened to me. I think you underestimate the impact of the power of God when He reveals Himself to a wretched sinner.

The truth cannot include both a biblical "U" and a biblical "R."

What? What 'R'? There is no 'R' in the TULIP. Are you just making up letters now?

I'd like to know if I even believe in this 'R' thing. What is it?

[xzins]

God's miraculous healing of diseased livers is sufficent for all, effective only for those He actually does heal. So, would the potential miracle healing be of any effect?

Too personal, GW....it's a dying friend/relative of mine. If your post is supposed to be humorous, it isn't. If it's supposed to be awesome debate technique, it's inappropriate.

[xzins]

The key has been the "I" (as in irresistible)

the opposite of "I" would then be "R" (resistible)

[The Grammarian]

I noticed that you ignored the rest of the scripture cites in my post. Typical Arminianism!

Wow, I forgot the bad attitude I was missing while I was away on vacation. I don't recall ever READING any other so-called citations in your post.

The problem is really yours. How can you maintain that the Atonement is unlimited unless you are a Universalist? Besides, deal with what verse in Hebrews is clear and without any intrepretational difficulties: "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."

The problem, actually, is yours. You must reconcile far more to a position of Limited Atonement than I must to a position of Unlimited Atonement. I can maintain very consistently that the intended scope of the Atonement is Unlimited, that is, Universal, without being a Universalist simply because I also recognize that the salvific benefits of the Atonement are efficient only to the regenerate. Hebrews 9:28 says nothing against my position, either; it simply, as xzins stated, deals with the issue of the efficiency, rather than the sufficiency, of the Atonement. On the other hand, Heb. 2:9 states that Christ "tasted death for everyone," and 1 Jn. 2:2 states that he is the propitiation for our (believers') sins, as well as for those of the whole world. Obvious contrast. See also Ron Rhodes' Case for Unlimited Atonement.

[The Grammarian]

"Verse 12. He bare the sin of many] Mybr rabbim, the multitudes, the many that were made sinners by the offences of one; i.e., the whole human race; for all have sinned-all have fallen; and for all that have sinned, and for all that have fallen, Jesus Christ died. The Mybr rabbim of the prophet answers to the oi polloi, of the apostle, #Ro 5:15, 19. As the polloi of the apostle means all that have sinned; so the Mybr rabbim of the prophet means those for whom Christ died; i.e., all that have sinned." (Good ol' Dr. Adam Clarke.)

[fortheDeclaration]

Faith is obedience Still making things up as you go along I see. No, faith is not obedience; they are 2 entirely separate things. Only in some kind of a wierd works based salvation can you define faith as being obedient. If that were the case, I could hate God and as long as I was obedient to him then I would still have saving faith. What a joke definition!

Well, what do you expect from someone who rejects scripture!

Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent (Jn.6:28-29) And the times of this ignorance God winked at, but now commandeth all men every where to repent (Acts.17:30) And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ...(1Jn.3:23)

He that hath my commandments. and keepeth them, he is that loveth me, and he that loveth me shall be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will manifest myself to him (Jn.13:21)

A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have also love one another (Jn.13:34)

If ye keep my commandments,ye shall abide in my love, even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love....This is my commandment that ye love one another, as I have loved you (Jn.15:10,15)

Obeying God is always an act of faith (Heb.11)

Take your silly 'logic' somewhere else. I do not know where you got the idea that you could outthink God!

[drstevej]

***If true faith can be recanted, then it must be true that one can willingly abdicate their justification, mustn't it?***

and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

I see no way that justification can be abdicated! Do you?

[Revelation 911]

Too personal, GW....it's a dying friend/relative of mine. If your post is supposed to be humorous, it isn't. If it's supposed to be awesome debate technique, it's inappropriate.

and wholly ignorant to those of us with liver disease - like myself

[Revelation 911]

Are you under the impression that Calvin is our pope?

No, quite clearly hes your god !

..I have not paid adaquate glory to your god Calvin

You are the ones that place him on a par with Jesus Christ,and untill I do you will accuse me of being a daughter of the devil. (snip)

145 Posted on 08/08/2001 15:15:45 PDT by RnMomof7

funny what 11 months of a daily barrage will do.

We still love you though ma - and still consider your original conversion valid in the eyes of the Lord.

[xzins]

I was thinking about this last night, but my mind was starting to fog. There would be two ways that it might work: (1) abdicate justification, or (2) be stripped of justification by God.

Those are the 2 possibilities I can think of J.

This is a tough issue for me because my tendency would be to fall back on my baptist upbringing and just say that it's impossible to lose one's salvation and that anyone who doesn't live it never really had it.

The difficulty there is all the scripture that speaks of conditional continuation.

Those conditional verses don't say so, but the assumption would have to be that God strips them of or permits to the abdicate their justification. To nail that down one would need a verse that specifically deals with that issue. I simply cannot think of one.

The "P", however, is not the issue with calvinism. The "P" does not cause the "U" to stand or fall. The "I", though, does. The "U" cannot stand if the "I" falls.