Yes, I definitely did say that.
But I also said that God requires men to die to sin and recreates men.
This is not ignoring sin, but it us also not condemning the righteous to acquit the guilty. We still suffer the same wages of sin that Christ suffered but in Him we have life.
(I am not trying to change your view, just hoping to offer an understanding of mine).
Ex-Calvinism (Why I am no longer a Calvinist)
Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by JonC, Jan 24, 2020.
Page 6 of 10
-
I agree that our sins are forgiven by being “born from above” as a new creation, IN CHRIST, and with a new heart. God saves because God chooses to make ALIVE, people that were DEAD in their sins (like in Eph 2:1-10). -
Iconoclast Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
George Antonios,
-
-
I believe God is just and the justified of sinners as redemption was His righteousness manifested apart from the law.
God sent His Son to bear our sins, laid our sins upon Him, was "pleased" to crush Him. Jesus humbled Himself and was obedient even to death. He took on our nature (the "Son of Man"). Suffering and dying under the curse (as the Son of man) yet without sin God justified Him and raised Him from the dead - the "Second Adam", the "Firstborn of many brethren". -
This brings up another interesting topic (for another thread and another time) concerning our present salvation in view of a final salvation.
Reading through Scripture it seems both are addressed. Sometimes it's difficult (for me) to kero up (but I'm not the sharpest tool anyway). -
And it seems you must chuck huge swathes of the Old Testament if you want to be consistent. Let's posit that Isaiah 53 is not a Messianic prophecy after all. That makes the case much easier. No, Christ was not pierced for our transgressions, he was not crushed for our iniquities, and it is ludicrous to think that the LORD laid upon him all our iniquities.
I listen to a good bit of Catholic radio when driving and am often amused by the juvenile apologies by supposed Catholic intellectuals that agree with you about the impropriety of the Father meting out vengeance upon his Son. It's pretty much child abuse, they say.
But they are bound up in their own philosophical dead ends. The distance from Anselm to Calvin is really a short one, but they must construct nonsensical eisegesis to uphold Trent. -
1.5._____ Those of mankind that are predestinated to life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a condition or cause moving him thereunto.
( Ephesians 1:4, 9, 11; Romans 8:30; 2 Timothy 1:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:9; Romans 9:13, 16; Ephesians 2:5, 12 )
All believers are predestined in Christ before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:3-4). That is what the text says. It is unambiguous and clear as a bell. Believers throughout out all of human history, have been chosen from the beginning (from eternity) for salvation in Jesus Christ (2 Thessalonians 2:13-14). To suggest that Calvinists believe otherwise is not a simple misunderstanding of Calvinism, it is a blatant falsehood. That is why certain individuals will not receive a direct response from me. -
- We were saved.
- We are saved.
- We shall be saved.
-
-
-
Iconoclast Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
I believe the reason many struggle to welcome these very truths and fine verses you have offered is a major failure to consider the work of all three persons of the Trinity in all these phases of redemption.
sometimes to better understand redemption, each individual frame,
[like the old 8 mm movies] is slowed down and scrutinized, but Gods work is fluid in real-time.
God does instantly what it takes us years to fully grasp. -
One is foreknowledge in terms of God having a type of relationship via Christ with those who are saved. This is a difficult topic because it places God outside of time, but God is eternal.
The second is election. Calvinism does not hold that God elected people based on their status in Christ. If this is what you are hinting at, then I strongly disagree. Election is based solely on the sovereign will of God.
But the Trinity is always involved. This is why Penal Substitution Theory is not "cosmic child abuse". Jesus is God. Essentially the theory places God as taking the punishment upon Himself. That said, we have to discuss individual doctrines, at least to an extent, individually or they become too cluttered. -
For example, the Bread:
- Christ’s body on the cross (past),
- one body of Christ assembled (present),
- the perfected ‘Body of Christ’ as all of the Saints forever in heaven (future)
-
-
Foreknowledge means to know beforehand. I have no idea what "God having a type of relationship via Christ" is supposed to mean because such language is foreign to scripture. An individual is either in Christ or he is not in Christ. God's foreknowledge in this regard is simply "a dimension of God's omniscience. God eternally knows all things that to humans appear to be "in the future."* God elected individuals after the counsel of His own will (Ephesians 1:11). Each and every person God predestined** He predestined as being in Christ.
You mention that it is problematic because it places God outside of time. That is not so. God created time. He operates in and out of linear time as we know it. The law of physics and all of the physical dimension were created by God. Mankind was created to operate within God's physical creation and to be governed by its laws. However, God is not limited by the laws He created. Those whom God elected were seen by God as already in Christ. They were not elected because of their status in Christ (as you stated) but because God, through election, placed them in that status. There was no soteriological cart before the horse.
*McKim
**Election and predestination are interchangeable terms. -
RighteousnessTemperance& Well-Known Member
-
My comment was that Calvinists hold God elected men based solely on His sovereign will.
And then I mentioned that Calvinist have presented foreknowledge two ways. John Calvin argued it as pre-knowledge (cognitive knowledge beforehand) based on God's decree of election.
But others (Legioner Ministries, for example) define foreknowledge as a relationship -
"This view does not reckon with the fact that God created time, and therefore all events in time, when He created the world,... A study of the idea of knowledge in the Bible will show that it usually involves a choice of intimate relations, as when Adam “knew” his wife Eve and she conceived. Romans 8:29 means that God “fore-loved” certain people, and predestinated them. He chose them; they did not choose Him."
I am not claiming either view is correct so why would I try to defend them biblically?
You are offering smoke, Reformed. -
-
OK, good people. It is bedtime. See you tomorrow. Same bat time; same bat channel.
Page 6 of 10