Challenge - The Golden Chain of Salvation

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

The problem with this analogy, Sandunsky, is that neither you nor I chose to be born with a sin nature/ concupisence or with original sin.

Correct, and more; neither you, nor I, nor anybody else, chose to be born at all.

One is born physically, only by the will of God, and that one will be re-born spiritually in the same way; namely, only by the will of God.

Catholics like “prefigurement.” That physical birth is only by the will of God is undeniable; so it is correct to assert that physical birth prefigures spiritual birth, which the scripture clearly states is not by the will of man, but, by the will of God (Jn 12:12-13; Rom 8:30; Rom 9:16; 1 Cor 1:30; Eph 1:4ff, 2:4-5; 1 Pet 1:3, et al.).

mikeledes:

Is there a time when man, apart from grace, was born innocent of sin and could chose to fall into sin or not?

Adam, and Jesus.

mikeledes:

Is all manking born like Adam before the fall, totally having self-control?

No.

mikeledes:

Is man capable of chosing God or repenting apart from the grace of God?

No.

mikeledes:

However, if man is incapable of repenting without being given an opportunity to repent through prevenient grace, then how can God’s desire for their repentance be sincere, knowing that without His intervention man is incapable of repentance?

I cannot find “prevenient grace;” it is elusive; all I find is saving grace (Eph 2:8, et al.).

Again, within the general will of God are things that God has not revealed, but He has decreed; they are fixed, and will come to pass (Dt 29:29; cf Ps 115:3; Dan 4:17, 25, 32, 35, et al.); one of those fixed things is whom He will save (Rom 8:30ff). Those decrees of God will come to pass; they are never thwarted, or overthrown by man, or anyone, or anything else, for that matter.

Also within the general will of God is His “perceptive” will, or His will of “desire,” a will that He has made known to men in which are contained the things that men “ought to do.” Such as, obey all of the commands of God that He has made known to man; such as, keeping the 10 commandments, loving God, and neighbor, repenting from sin, and unbelief (cf 1 Tim 2:4.) God’s perceptive will, or will of “desire,” is always overthrown by men—God endures this overthrowing of His perceptive will for a reason (cf Rom 9:22).

mikeledes:

Pelagianism believes man can chose to repent without divine aid, simply through their natural powers. You give the impression that the reprobate had a choice, that they were capable of chosing God, but chose sin instead.

Where do I give that impression?

mikeledes:

Do you believe a person can chose God apart from grace?

As I said above, no.

 

[mikeledes]

Correct, and more; neither you, nor I, nor anybody else, chose to be born at all.

One is born physically, only by the will of God, and that one will be re-born spiritually in the same way; namely, only by the will of God.

Catholics like “prefigurement.” That physical birth is only by the will of God is undeniable; so it is correct to assert that physical birth prefigures spiritual birth, which the scripture clearly states is not by the will of man, but, by the will of God (Jn 12:12-13; Rom 8:30; Rom 9:16; 1 Cor 1:30; Eph 1:4ff, 2:4-5; 1 Pet 1:3, et al.).

Man cannot will himself into a child of God. That requires God’s intervention and initiative. Now you cannot be so strict in your comparison of “natural” birth with “spiritual” birth or push it too far. Being physically born does not involve our minds, will, and hearts at all. And yet even Calvinists will admit that the human mind and will is involved in salvation, especially “soft” determinists/ compatibilists. There is a conscious choice involved in spiritual rebirth, whereas in physical birth there is no conscious desire or choice.

I cannot find “prevenient grace;” it is elusive; all I find is saving grace (Eph 2:8, et al.).

It is the same as “drawing”, which Jesus said he will do to all men.

Where do I give that impression?

You say that the unregenerated sinner did not have a gun to his head when he sins, as if he could chose not to sin. Besides, if man is born an unbeliever are we not already born under the wrath of God irrespective of when we first personally sin or what kind of sins we freely commit? You seem to make this “wrath” a response to personal sins. In the case of a child who dies in the womb or an infant, are they assured salvation simply because they did not reach the age of reason? Are they innocent until they reach the age of reason?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

Certainly, man cannot change the number of the elect. We both agree on that. Now you talk about a 'perceptive" will, which contains what man ought to do. ** I find this too cold to describe the express words of God:**

John 3:16

16"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17"For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

Another logical fallacy: appeal to emotion, “I find this too cold…”

Then why does Jesus, in His “Priestly prayer,” not pray for the world, if “He desires all of the world to be saved, and to come to a knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim 2:4)?John 17:9

“…I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours;Is Jesus being ”too cold?”

mikeledes:

Ezekiel 18:23

23"Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?

God is not merely expressing what man ought to do. He is not saying “Man ought to repent” or “I desire that man obey my command to repent.” He is expressing a positive sentiment on what he desires man to do. He is not merely commanding the world to repent, He is expressing His love for the world. This love is expressed in His sincere call and desire for all men to come to repentance (John 3:16). And because of this love, He makes the grace of repentance accessible to all.

You’re reading into the text, Mike; and, you are changing the name of “prevenient grace” into “the grace of repentance.” That is a semantical sleight-of-hand. Where in that text, or anywhere else, does God promise to give every single person ever born “prevenient grace,” or “the grace of repentance?” All I find is saving grace (Acts 2:8ff, et al.).

With respect to Jesus love for the WORLD, why does He specifically pray, “not for the world,” but only for the elect?John 17:9

“…I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours;

mikeledes:

2 Chronicles 15:2

2and he went out to meet Asa and said to him, "Listen to me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin: the LORD is with you when you are with Him And if you seek Him, He will let you find Him; but if you forsake Him, He will forsake you.

Prior to the signs Jesus performed (John 12:37) and his public ministry, the Jews had the testimony of Moses (John 5:46-47) and the testimoy of John (John 1:6-8; 5:33-35). God desired that they would come to Christ, but they chose to reject Him:

You’re going to different verses, but repeating the same thing. See John 12:39ff for the same response. You refuse to keep in mind that behind the actions of men the eternal decrees of God are being brought to pass in time; so you view it all from the perspective “under the sun.”

mikeledes:

Luke 13:34-35

34"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!
35"Behold, your house is left to you desolate; and I say to you, you will not see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!’"

They rejected this illumination from God through Moses and John and refused to believe their testimony. Since they forsook God, God forsook them and handed them over to their unbelief by withdrawing/witholding His grace (i.e. “hardening their hearts”), thus completely stopping any further illumination. Thus, without grace, they could not come to faith. Consequently, when Jesus began His public ministry and performed many signs (John 12:37), they could not believe because God had withdrawn His grace. However, this was not without purpose:

That is the standard Arminian verse used to “prove” free-will; however, you claim something else with it. As with all of the verses you cite, you print the verse, and then assert that it supports your position. Until you tear that verse apart, and show how it supports your position, I’ll leave it alone.

Again, you assert that the Jews rejected God’s “illumination,” which I assume is what you formerly called, “the grace of repentance,” which you formerly called, “prevenient grace.”

The only grace connected with salvation that I read about in scripture, is “saving grace,” (Eph 2:8ff, et al.).

(continued)

 

[sandusky]

(continued from post #262)

mikeledes:

Romans 11:30-32

30For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience,
31so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy.
32For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all.

The beauty of divine providence. God allowed the Jews to freely reject His illumination and, in turn, handed them over to unbelief in order to extend the scope of His mercy.

You continue to repeat yourself, while employing new verses.

You still have yet to prove, that God gives to all men, an ”illuminating, prevenient grace, that is to repentance.”

The grace to salvation that I read about in scripture, is a grace given to complete salvation (Rom 8:30; Eph 2:8ff, et al.); and that not to everyone.

mikeledes:

There is no indication in the text whether those who did not believe Jesus later believed in Him after He was glorified. This “hardening” could have been temporary in the case of individual Jews until God accomplished His purpose.

Again you repeat yourself.

As I stated before:

I have acknowledged that God did not reject all of the Jews, but that God Himself, kept for Himself, a remnant—those that He saved (Rom 11:4).

What does "I have kept for Myself…a remant" (Rom 11:4), mean to you?

 

[Pax]

Sandusky,

Perhaps a different angle or way of expressing all of this will help. Please note that all men must receive grace to be saved because all are born in unbelief and disobedience.

God’s grace is given to all in order that all may be saved. We know that not everyone will be saved and that many will resist God’s grace and will resist the Holy Spirit. We have examples in scripture that go a long way in showing just how this works. I will use Pharoah as the case study.

The following scripture passages are pertinent to the point at hand:

Exodus 7:13-17
For every man cast down his rod, and they became serpents. But Aaron’s rod swallowed up their rods. Still Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he would not listen to them; as the Lord had said. Then the Lord said to Moses, "Pharaoh’s heart is hardened, he refuses to let the people go.

Exodus 7:21-23
And the fish in the Nile died; and the Nile became foul, so that the Egyptians could not drink water from the Nile; and there was blood throughout all the land of Egypt. But the magicians of Egypt did the same by their secret arts; so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened, and he would not listen to them; as the Lord had said. Pharaoh turned and went into his house, and he did not lay even this to heart.

Exodus 8:15
But when Pharaoh saw that there was a respite, he hardened his heart, and would not listen to them; as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:19
And the magicians said to Pharaoh, “This is the finger of God.” But Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he would not listen to them; as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:32
And the Lord did as Moses asked, and removed the swarms of flies from Pharaoh, from his servants, and from his people; not one remained. But Pharaoh hardened his heart this time also, and did not let the people go.

Exodus 9:7
And Pharaoh sent, and behold, not one of the cattle of the Israelites was dead. But the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people go.

Exodus 9:12
But the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh, and he did not listen to them; as the Lord had spoken to Moses.

Exodus 9:34-35
But when Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the thunder had ceased, he sinned yet again, and hardened his heart, he and his servants. So the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people of Israel go; as the Lord had spoken through Moses.

Exodus 10:1-2
Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go in to Pharaoh; for I have hardened his heart and the heart of his servants, that I may show these signs of mine among them, and that you may tell in the hearing of your son and of your son’s son how I have made sport of the Egyptians and what signs I have done among them; that you may know that I am the Lord.”

Exodus 10:19-20
And the Lord turned a very strong west wind, which lifted the locusts and drove them into the Red Sea; not a single locust was left in all the country of Egypt. But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he did not let the children of Israel go.

Exodus 10:27
But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he would not let them go.

Exodus 11:10
Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh; and the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he did not let the people of Israel go out of his land.

Exodus 14:8
And the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt and he pursued the people of Israel as they went forth defiantly.

The quoted passages demonstrate that both God and Pharoah hardened Pharoah’s heart. This is very important. Most interestingly is the fact that the actions taken by God through Moses brought faith and hope to the Israelites but had a completely different effect on Pharaoh. Pharoah should have been in awe of what Yahweh did and should have been converted but he was not. Interestingly enough, some Egyptians were converted but not Pharoah.

God’s power and grace work similarly in the rest of mankind. Some accept God’s grace and some do not.

Origen had a great analogy for all of this. He said the following:

"Now it is not incorrect to say that the sun, by one and the same power of its heat, melts wax indeed, but dries up and hardens mud: not that its power operates One way upon mud, and in another way upon wax; but that the qualities of mud and wax are different, although according to nature they are one thing, both being from the earth. In this way, then, one and the same working upon the part of God, which was administered by Moses in signs and wonders, made manifest the hardness of Pharaoh, which he had conceived in the intensity of his wickedness? but exhibited the obedience of those other Egyptians who were intermingled with the Israelites, and who are recorded to have quitted Egypt at the same time with the Hebrews."Bk 3 Preface of Rufinus CHAP. I.–ON THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL,(2) WITH AN EXPLANATION AND INTERPRETATION OF THOSE STATEMENTS OF SCRIPTURE WHICH APPEAR TO NULLIFY IT.}]

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

Actually, that is not my real question and you are missing my entire point. My real question is how can God state that he sincerely desires the repentance of the wicked and at the same time withold the means of potentially accomplishing that?

Forgive me for missing your point, Mike.

Your point remains the same.

Your point assumes that God’s desiring something, and God’s purposing something are one and the same; it further assumes an obligation on God’s part to be an ***equal opportunity forgiver.***Romans 9:21

Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?Does the potter have that right?

Everyone comes from the same lump—Adam—there is no organic, or intrinsic difference in the ones born of Adam; they begin life on an equal footing.

God does not have to level the playing field; it is already level by virtue of the fact that each is made from the same lump; isn’t that correct?

Rather, God gives to one, what He withholds from another; that is His right; isn’t it?

God’s giving to one is mercy, and free grace; free grace, because no one can demand it from Him; God’s withholding mercy, and grace from another is called justice; it is God’s right to choose who receives which of those two things. (Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated).

If God withheld His mercy, and grace from all men, then all men would perish; isn’t that correct? Wouldn’t God be righteous and just in doing so?

You keep insisting that God gives the ability to believe to everyone equally, so that each may freely choose one way, or the other; but you still haven’t proven that. I have consistently shown you from scripture that God gives, and withholds His mercy, and grace, on the basis of His right as creator.

I said:

…that passage [Jn 12:32], does not mean “all mankind,” or all men without exception, as mikeledes asserts; but it means all men without distinction as to Jew, or Gentile; rich, or poor; healthy, or sick, etc.

To which, you replied:

mikeledes:

I essence, all mankind. This is demonstrated in post # 247.

Your post #247, lists the following verses: Jn 12:32; Titus 2:11; Jn 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2; 1 Tim 4:10.

In my post #234 I demonstrated how Jn 12:32 cannot mean “all men” without exception; that is your argument; isn’t it? That Christ calls “all men without exception?”

You still have not answered my question with respect to Jn 3:16ff; if, “God so loved the world,” means each, and every person in the world, without exception, then why, in Jn 17:9, is Christ not concerned with the world, but only with those the Father had given Him? Same question with respect to 1 Jn 2:2; it seems that as with “all men,” so too, “the world,” does not mean what you say it does.

In Titus 2:11, what is the grace of God that has appeared? How does the appearance of that grace bring salvation to all men?

In 1 Tim 4:10, how is the living God the Savior of “all men?” (There’s that term again).

You will probably say to both of those, “because God gives illuminating, prevenient grace to repentance to all men, so that they can choose whether or not they will believe?” Isn’t that correct?

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

Man cannot will himself into a child of God. That requires God’s intervention and initiative.

And the initiative and intervention is purposeful, and done with the intent of saving perfectly the one upon whom the intervention is convened.

mikeledes:

Now you cannot be so strict in your comparison of “natural” birth with “spiritual” birth or push it too far. Being physically born does not involve our minds, will, and hearts at all. And yet even Calvinists will admit that the human mind and will is involved in salvation, especially “soft” determinists/ compatibilists. There is a conscious choice involved in spiritual rebirth, whereas in physical birth there is no conscious desire or choice.

Cutting to the point of belief—it is a gift, unmerited and undeserved, granted by God (Eph 2:8ff; Php 1:29). One consciously believes, at the time of God’s choosing; belief is then conferred upon the individual; I am firm in my understanding that, although one responds, and believes freely, faith is completely the possession of God gifted to the believer; thus the promises of God to the believer, that He is protected, and kept to the end of his life.

mikeledes:

It is the same as “drawing”, which Jesus said he will do to all men.

We’ve been through this already, Mike; you are still only in the realm of assertion,
and not proof.

In my post #234 I demonstrated how Jn 12:32 cannot mean “all men” without exception; that is your argument; isn’t it? That Christ calls “all men without exception?”

You still have not answered my question with respect to Jn 3:16ff; if, “God so loved the world,” means each, and every person in the world, without exception, then why, in Jn 17:9, is Christ not concerned with the world, but only with those whom the Father gives Him?

Same question with respect to 1 Jn 2:2; also, is Christ the propitiation for the sins of the vessels of wrath in Romans 9? The vessels fitted for destruction?

In Titus 2:11, what is the grace of God that has appeared? How does the appearance of that grace bring salvation to all men? Does the appearance of that grace bring salvation to the vessels of wrath in Romans 9? The vessels fitted for destruction?

In 1 Tim 4:10, how is the living God the Savior of “all men?” Is the living God the savior of the vessels of wrath in Romans 9? The vessels fitted for destruction?

mikeledes:

You say that the unregenerated sinner did not have a gun to his head when he sins, as if he could chose not to sin.

We’ve both agreed that he cannot chose not to sin; neither can he repent apart from God’s will.

mikeledes:

Besides, if man is born an unbeliever are we not already born under the wrath of God irrespective of when we first personally sin or what kind of sins we freely commit? You seem to make this “wrath” a response to personal sins.

Eph 2:3 says, tekna fusei orgās, lit., “children by nature of [God’s] wrath,” condemned to suffer God’s righteous anger against sin. Pretty bleak (cf Job 14:4; 15:14; Ps 51:5; 58:3).

mikeledes:

In the case of a child who dies in the womb or an infant, are they assured salvation simply because they did not reach the age of reason? Are they innocent until they reach the age of reason?

When you are able to demonstrate from scripture, the veracity of your assertion that God gives to the “world,” which means to “all mankind,” or, more specifically, to “all men without exception,” an “illuminating prevenient grace to repentance,” or, admit that you cannot demonstrate that, then, perhaps, we can examine the issue you’ve just raised.

 

[Philthy]

With respect to Jesus love for the WORLD, why does He specifically pray, “not for the world,” but only for the elect?

Just when your point seemed most reasonable, it occurred to me that if it makes no sense for Jesus to pray for the reprobate because they will not respond, it makes equally no sense to pray for the elect either since they can’t not respond! If they are the elect, why pray for them at all?
Also, isnt the “world” often a reference to Satan’s rule and the lures of sin we now face; rather than a reference to those living in the world? Such as 1 John 2:15-16 “Do not love THE WORLD or the things of the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.”

 

[mikeledes]

Another logical fallacy: appeal to emotion, “I find this too cold…”

Then why does Jesus, in His “Priestly prayer,” not pray for the world, if “He desires all of the world to be saved, and to come to a knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim 2:4)?John 17:9

“…I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours;Is Jesus being ”too cold?”

I have very little time, but I will respond to this as much as I can. The “cold” was in reference to your own analysis, not to the words of Scripture. Secondly, it is clear, based on the context of John 17:9, that He is specifically talking about the apostles and that the use of “world” is not referring to “mankind”, but to the dominion and things of Satan.

John 17:6, 12, 14, 21

**6 "I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world i.e. the Twelve]; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. **
**12"While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition [Judas], so that the Scripture would be fulfilled. **
**14"I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. **
**20 key transition ]"I do not ask on behalf of these alone (i.e. the Twelve), but for those also who believe in Me through their word;
21that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. **

As Philthy correctly pointed out, the “world” is used in different senses by Jesus. In the first half of His prayer, Jesus was praying specifically for the Apostles and was not praying for the world (i.e. the realm of Satan). However, by verse 21, there is a transition in His prayer. He has now expanded His prayer to include all those who come to believe in Him through the witness of His disciples and then He finally ends His prayer by praying that the world - used in the sense of all mankind - may believe in His name (v. 21). Context, context, context. Jesus was not being “cold”, but was praying in keeping with God’s universal love for the world (i.e. mankind) (John 3:16). I will answer the rest of your argument another time.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

I have very little time, but I will respond to this as much as I can. The “cold” was in reference to your own analysis, not to the words of Scripture. Secondly, it is clear, based on the context of John 17:9, that He is specifically talking about the apostles and that the use of “world” is not referring to “mankind”, but to the dominion and things of Satan.

As Philthy correctly pointed out, the “world” is used in different senses by Jesus. In the first half of His prayer, Jesus was praying specifically for the Apostles and was not praying for the world (i.e. the realm of Satan). However, by verse 21, there is a transition in His prayer. He has now expanded His prayer to include all those who come to believe in Him through the witness of His disciples and then He finally ends His prayer by praying that the world - used in the sense of all mankind - may believe in His name (v. 21). Context, context, context. Jesus was not being “cold”, but was praying in keeping with God’s universal love for the world (i.e. mankind) (John 3:16). I will answer the rest of your argument another time.

(I’ll be very scarce until Friday so no need to hurry, or overload posts.)

Good Mike, you have come to the understanding that “World” has different meanings depending upon the context in which it is used.

The same is true of “all men,” as I have demonstrated to you (although I don’t think it will have a lasting effect; you will more than likely continue to press that all men means all mankind means each and every individual ).

 

[mikeledes]

(I’ll be very scarce until Friday so no need to hurry, or overload posts.)

Good Mike, you have come to the understanding that “World” has different meanings depending upon the context in which it is used.

The same is true of “all men,” as I have demonstrated to you (although I don’t think it will have a lasting effect; you will more than likely continue to press that all men means all mankind means each and every individual ).

It is clear that the Bible uses the word “world” in many different senses (i.e. earth, realm of satan, all mankind). What has not been clearly shown is that “all men” means anything other than what the words clearly state. You have at least admitted that world can be used to mean “all mankind”. The qualifier you add to all men - “without distinction” - is based on a theological bias. But I can accept that “all men” means “without dinstinction.” Yes, Jesus will draw all men without distinction, Gentile or Jew, rich or poor, male or female, elect or reprobate…

Scripture clearly shows that all men refers to both elect and reprobate, not just the elect:

1 Timothy 4:10

10For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers

Note the distinction made between “all men” and “believers.” The use of “especially” demonstrates that while the “believers” are included among “all men”, “all men” and “believers” are not interchangeable. In other words, “believers” are a subset of “all men”. Secondly, if “believers” means “the elect”, than the passage would read:

10For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of the elect.

Therefore, the phrase “all men” would include both the elect and the reprobate.

To be continued…

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

1 Timothy 4:10

**10For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers. **

Now let’s compare this verse with the following verse:

1 John 4:14

14We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.

Savior of all men … Savior of the World…

1 John 2:2

2and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours i.e. believers] only, but also for those of the whole world.

John 12:47

** 47"If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.**

And just several verses before the above verse, Jesus said:

**32"And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself." **.

“World” and “all men” are used interchangeably in the Bible, and hence they both mean the same thing. “All men” and the “world” includes the elect and the reprobate. But let me add another verse I have used earlier:

John 1:9

9There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.

There is a subtle difference between “all” and “every.” Dictionary.com defines “every”:

**1. being one of a group or series taken collectively; each **

Every man means each man. In other words, all mankind. And how will Jesus enlighten every man. He says it in John 12:32. He will draw all men to Himself, elect and reprobate.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

See John 12:39ff for the same response. You refuse to keep in mind that behind the actions of men the eternal decrees of God are being brought to pass in time; so you view it all from the perspective “under the sun.”

I do believe that behind the actions of man the eternal decrees of God are being brought to pass in time. God has providential control over history and nothing - particularly the execution of His plan of salvation - happens haphazardly. However, I believe that in the “execution” of these decrees, God willingly involves - incorporates - the freedom of the will.

When I asked the following question:

Is there a time when man, apart from grace, was born innocent of sin and could chose to fall into sin or not?

You answered:

Adam, and Jesus.

So you admit that Adam had the freedom to chose whether to sin or not. That when he sinned, he did not have a gun to his head and is thus completely responsible for what he did. Now I ask you, was the Fall of Man one of the eternal decrees of God? Election occured before the Fall. However, election and reprobation presupposes the existence of a massa damnata (i.e. a mass of condemned sinners) from which to select and save the elect. In order for there to be a massa damnata from which God would select His elect, there had to be a Fall. The death and resurrection of Jesus was foreordained and thus presupposes a Fall.

Acts 4:27-28

27"For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel,
28to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur.

1 Peter 1:20

**20For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you **

Now you agree that Adam had free choice in the matter and rightfuly so. Otherwise, the alternative would be that God is causally responsible for Adam’s sin. However, if the Fall was an eternal decree and Adam’s sin was a free act, you apparently see no contradiction between the execution of a decree in time and the libertarian freedom of the will of Adam. I believe that God involves the free will of man in accomplishing His plan of salvation and that this in no way diminished His eternal decrees. He choses the elect and the elect, in turn, freely choses Him.

God bless,
Michael

 

[Philthy]

I believe that behind the actions of man the eternal decrees of God are being brought to pass in time. …
…you agree that Adam had free choice …Otherwise, …God is causally responsible for Adam’s sin. However, if the Fall was an eternal decree and Adam’s sin was a free act, you apparently see no contradiction between the execution of a decree in time and the libertarian freedom of the will of Adam.
God bless,
Michael

 

[Linkowski]

1 Timothy 4:10

10For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.

Now let’s compare this verse with the following verse:

1 John 4:14

14We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.

Savior of all men … Savior of the World…

1 John 2:2

2and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours i.e. believers] only, but also for those of the whole world.

John 12:47

** 47"If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world**.

And just several verses before the above verse, Jesus said:

**32"And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men **to Myself." .

“World” and “all men” are used interchangeably in the Bible, and hence they both mean the same thing. “All men” and the “world” includes the elect and the reprobate. But let me add another verse I have used earlier:

John 1:9

9There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.

There is a subtle difference between “all” and “every.” Dictionary.com defines “every”:

1. being one of a group or series taken collectively; each

Every man means each man. In other words, all mankind. And how will Jesus enlighten every man. He says it in John 12:32. He will draw all men to Himself, elect and reprobate.

God Bless,
Michael

Yet you ignore the passages that complement these passages…Christ’s death was sufficient for all but only efficient for the elect…

John 6:37 "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.

John 6:44 "***No one ***can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and **I will raise him up **on the last day.

John 6:65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”

John 17:2 even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life.

John 10:11 "I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.

John 10:15 NAS95 15 even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.

He does not say the world here…why?

Christ’s death was sufficient for all but only efficient for the elect…

Acts 13:48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

Was it Esau’s will that got him in trouble…NO…He was already in trouble just like everyone else. God just passed over him…WHAT?? How can that be!!! That’s not fair!

Romans 9:14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!

Pharaoh was chosen as a vessel of wrath…Because of his choice!!! Not ultimately…it was God ultimately…WHAT!!! WAIT A SECOND!!! THATS NOT RIGHT!

Romans 9:18-22 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. 19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?

We have been through this, Mike.

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

It is clear that the Bible uses the word “world” in many different senses (i.e. earth, realm of satan, all mankind). What has not been clearly shown is that “all men” means anything other than what the words clearly state. You have at least admitted that world can be used to mean “all mankind”. The qualifier you add to all men - “without distinction” - is based on a theological bias.

Romans 3:23

for ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"All" in that passage is the same Gk word, pas, used in Jn 12:32 (men does not appear
in the Gk).

In Rom 3:23, does pas mean all, without exception? If not, what kind of bias do you call that?

mikeledes:

But I can accept that “all men” means “without dinstinction.” Yes, Jesus will draw all men without distinction, Gentile or Jew, rich or poor, male or female, elect or reprobate…

”Without distinction” refers to “every tribe, tongue, people, nation.”**Revelation 5:9

And they sang a new song, saying, “Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.*

(Note, that is not “all men without exception.”)*

mikeledes1 Timothy 4:10

For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers

Note the distinction made between “all men” and “believers.” The use of “especially” demonstrates that while the “believers” are included among “all men”, “all men” and “believers” are not interchangeable. In other words, “believers” are a subset of “all men”. Secondly, if “believers” means “the elect”, than the passage would read:

For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of the elect.

You’re begging the question with your scripture re-phrasing.

The “elect” are a subset of “all men,” and a very special one, as the verse indicates.

But you still haven’t explained, how God is the savior of “all men,” without exception.

God is the savior—specially—only of that subset of “all men,” who are called “elect, and who are only “some men,” as opposed to “all men.”

IOW, those who are not in the subset of the “elect,” are not saved, correct? So in what way then, is God the savior of “all men,” without exception, if “all men,” without exception, are not saved?

All men, including all of the rebrobate who will never be saved, benefit from the Cross; but, as Paul points out, believers, or the elect, benefit specially. Everyone is a recipient of grace from God, but the elect specially.

God causes the sun to rise on the evil, and the good, and He causes the rain to fall on the righteous, and the unrighteous, thereby ensuring them food to eat, and water to drink (Mt 5:45); God establishes earthly governments (Rom 13); and any number of things; but God does not specially grace everyone, in the way in which he graces the elect—grace to believe.

The Jn 12 passage, pointed out to you (vv39ff), states that God rejected the Jews, and in so doing, He prevented them from turning around to “be converted, and I heal them.”

God is purposeful, and wise, and He does nothing without purpose; what purpose is served by Christ calling men to Himself whom He previously rejected (Rom 9:13; Is 6:10ff)?

You’re getting closer; the “all men” referred to in Jn 12:32, does not mean “all men without exception,” but all men contained within the subset of the “elect”.

Can you hear me now?

 

[mikeledes]

Yet you ignore the passages that complement these passages…Christ’s death was sufficient for all but only efficient for the elect…

John 6:37 "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.

John 6:44 "***No one ***can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and **I will raise him up **on the last day.

John 6:65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”

John 17:2 even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life.

John 10:11 "I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.

John 10:15 NAS95 15 even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.

He does not say the world here…why?

Christ’s death was sufficient for all but only efficient for the elect…

Acts 13:48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

Was it Esau’s will that got him in trouble…NO…He was already in trouble just like everyone else. God just passed over him…WHAT?? How can that be!!! That’s not fair!

Romans 9:14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!

Pharaoh was chosen as a vessel of wrath…Because of his choice!!! Not ultimately…it was God ultimately…WHAT!!! WAIT A SECOND!!! THATS NOT RIGHT!

Romans 9:18-22 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. 19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?

We have been through this, Mike.

Hi Linkowski! I am not arguing here that the entire world will be saved. What I am arguing is that God gives a bona fide offer of salvation to all makind. God offers prevenient grace to all, though not all will accept it and be moved to faith. Those that do accept it, come to faith, and persevere are the elect. I am also arguing that God has providential control, but this control does not mean that he does not take into account the freedom of the will.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Revelation 5:9

And they sang a new song, saying, “Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.*

(*Note, that is not “all men without exception.”)[/indent]

And the “purchased” only include the elect?

2 Peter 2:1

1But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.

These are oviously not of the elect and yet they are described as having been purchased by Christ.

To be continued…

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

You’re getting closer; the “all men” referred to in Jn 12:32, does not mean “all men without exception,” but all men contained within the subset of the “elect”.

Now you’re really pushing the text. “All men” is never used in the Bible in reference to those men contained in the elect. It is always used in its brodest sense, as demontsrated by the verse I gave you from 1 Timothy. Let me add another verse:

Galatians 6:10

10As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

Once again, believers are depicted as being a subset of all men.

John 12:47

**47"If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. **

Jesus came to save the world. Now, in its broadest sense, how is Jesus the Savior of all men, both elect and reprobate? He made provision for all of their sins (both elect and reprobate) through His work on the Cross.

1 John 2:2
2and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours i.e. believers] only, but also for those of the whole world.

God desires the salvation of all men:

1 Timothy 2:3-4
**3This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
4who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. **

And this is in keeping with His love for the world:

John 3:16

16"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17"For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

When “all men” is used in the Bible, Sandunsky, it is always used to include both elect and the reprobate, not just the elect. Therefore, when you have verses like:

John 12:32

**32"And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself." . **

John 1:9

**9There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. **

And understand them within the context of verses like John 3:16, 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2;3-4, etc., you see that the “all men” in John 12 can only mean elect and reprobate.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

I do believe that behind the actions of man the eternal decrees of God are being brought to pass in time. God has providential control over history and nothing - particularly the execution of His plan of salvation - happens haphazardly. However, I believe that in the “execution” of these decrees, God willingly involves - incorporates - the freedom of the will.

When I asked the following question:

You answered:

So you admit that Adam had the freedom to chose whether to sin or not. That when he sinned, he did not have a gun to his head and is thus completely responsible for what he did. Now I ask you, was the Fall of Man one of the eternal decrees of God? Election occured before the Fall. However, election and reprobation presupposes the existence of a massa damnata (i.e. a mass of condemned sinners) from which to select and save the elect. In order for there to be a massa damnata from which God would select His elect, there had to be a Fall. The death and resurrection of Jesus was foreordained and thus presupposes a Fall.

Acts 4:27-28

27"For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel,
28to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur.

1 Peter 1:20

20For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you

Now you agree that Adam had free choice in the matter and rightfuly so. Otherwise, the alternative would be that God is causally responsible for Adam’s sin. However, if the Fall was an eternal decree and Adam’s sin was a free act, you apparently see no contradiction between the execution of a decree in time and the libertarian freedom of the will of Adam. I believe that God involves the free will of man in accomplishing His plan of salvation and that this in no way diminished His eternal decrees. He choses the elect and the elect, in turn, freely choses Him.

God bless,
Michael

I would also like a response to this since it directly has to do with the relationship between the sovereign will of God and the will of man, the topic of our discussion.

God Bless,
Michael