Does Understanding Eschatology Prove You Are Saved?

[PinSeeker]

Yada, yada. yada...

Grace and peace to you.

 

[TribulationSigns]

LOL. You are hilarious. You quoting them word for word doesn't make your interpretation of them correct. Nowhere do those verses say that God predestined certain individuals to believe. That is not what those verses say. What He predestined is that those who believe in Christ would be adopted and would be conformed to the image of Christ, etc.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Do you believe that God loves the world, PinSeeker? If so, then why would you believe that He predestined certain individuals to believe when scripture teaches that WHOSOEVER believes in HIm should not perish, but have everlasting life? Your view is that, in relation to giving eternal life, God does not love the world, but only loves certain people who He decided to give faith to while being content with allowing the rest of the people in the world to remain in darkness and destined for eternal tormet with no opportunity for eternal life. But, scripture teaches WHOSOEVER in the world can believe in Him, not whosoever God choose to believe will believe in Him.

Please allow me, @PinSeeker.

Ahem... Spiritual Israelitie...

No...the word world means He came to save all kindreds, tongues and nations, universally. Not every single person of every tongue and nation. The Greek word translated world is [kosmos], meaning it's ordered, such as a group, planet or universe. I'm not making any new definition, as the word is found many times throughout the Bible. Most times we see it used it's speaking about the world of unsaved men. But not exclusively. In fact, we use it in our normal English in that same sense of Cosmic, meaning that it's universal in character. The word cosmic is derived from he Greek word [kosmos] or cosmos. Christ came to save all men of the world universally, not every man universally. Ergo, the whole world without distinction, not everyone in the world without exception. Even as I demonstrated, if world meant everyone, why would God sometimes use it in referring only to the Unsaved world? That usage would make no sense if "world" always meant every single person in the world.

1st John 4:4-5

• "Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.
• They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them."

See? Them and us. This is the same Greek word [kosmos], and if it meant every single person in the world, it would have God speaking foolishness in terms of the people of the world versus us. Here, the unsaved are universally of the world, but not those who are of God. So clearly [kosmos] can't always mean every single person, but here it means a unsaved group universally.

Selah!

Moreover,

1st John 3:13

• "Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you."

Again, the same Greek word [kosmos]. The world hates Christians. That is to say, the unsaved universally hate Christians. Clearly, the world is not everyone in the world here, but it illustrates the unsaved world only. Thus it is improper to declare that the word world means everyone in the world when it obviously doesn't always mean that. There is one world of people that Christ came to save (His People Mt 1:21), and one world that will never find redemption and are destined (Jude 1:4) for hell.

2nd Corinthians 5:19

• "To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation."

This is the "world" God so loved, that He gave His Son for, not for the world that will never see redemption in His blood. Hello? Because if the world never has its sin imputed unto them, then punishment, condemnation, judgment and the Wrath of God is a myth and the Bible untrustworthy.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Readers...

John 3:16-17

• For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
• For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Whosoever believes shall be saved, but no one will believe because no one will seek Christ without the Spirit drawing them. Faith or belief is NOT something we have in ourselves, it is something given us in Christ.

Hebrews 12:2

• "Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God."

So then those who have faith to believe, those whom God loves, are those all over the world whom God gives the gift of faith to believe.

Philippians 1:6

• "Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:"

Philippians 1:29

• "For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;"

And thus, the world through Him believes and perseveres and "is" saved. I'm in total agreement with the witness of the Word, not in disagreement with it. The rule for coming to sound exegesis of scripture is to never contradict "any" scripture. Scriptures don't Duel with each other, they are in harmony. Men duel with each other, misapplying and misusing scriptures.

Matthew 18:6-7

• "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
• Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!"

Woe unto everyone in the world because of offenses against the children, or woe unto everyone who offends them in the world? Scripture must be harmonized! When it says God so loved the world, it also says God hates the workers of iniquity. That would be an obvious contradiction if we were to understand "world" in this context the way you desire to understand it. But in understanding it in the way God uses it, we understand that God loves His people of the world and hates the workers of iniquity in the world. His words, not Mine. All we have to do is RECEIVE both statements in harmony with each other in the Spirit of truth.

Selah!

 

[PinSeeker]

Really, @TribulationSigns , all that should be necessary is to point out any one of several things. You cited some of them, but these are the clearest to me:

"I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes and be careful to obey My rules" (Ezekiel 11:19-20, 36:26-27)

"...to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13).

"You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide..." (John 15:16)

"Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! For he says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.' So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy... For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed in all the earth.' So then He has mercy on whomever He wills, and He hardens whomever He wills" (Romans 9:14-18).

"...we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ ~ by grace you have been saved ~ and raised us up with Him and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus... For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,..." (Ephesians 2:3-10).

"Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God Who empowers them all in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, Who apportions to each one individually as He wills." (1 Corinthians 12:4-11).

"...if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to Himself..." (2 Corinthians 5:16-17)

"...work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

"...He has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time" (1 Peter 1:3-5).

Not an exhaustive list by any means, of course. But it is what it is. Old Testament and New. I would, though, say that there's a reason why this appears in so many different places and ways in Scripture... <smile> What's amazing is that anyone ~ anyone, believer or not ~ with any modicum of real knowledge of Scripture can remain in denial of these things, but so it is...

Grace and peace to you.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Really, @TribulationSigns , all that should be necessary is to point out any one of several things. You cited some of them, but these are the clearest to me:

I know, right.

 

[TribulationSigns]

There really is no middle ground. Either you believe in one, or you believe in the other. A comparison will show this clearly.

Calvinism and Arminianism comparison

All those who seek to compromise come up short.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I got nothin' to refute anything you said.

Yep.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Please allow me, @PinSeeker.

Ahem... Spiritual Israelitie...

LOL. This ought to be good. The guy who thinks Satan is not a real, living being is about to attempt to educate me. How interesting.

No...the word world means He came to save all kindreds, tongues and nations, universally. Not every single person of every tongue and nation. The Greek word translated world is [kosmos], meaning it's ordered, such as a group, planet or universe. I'm not making any new definition, as the word is found many times throughout the Bible. Most times we see it used it's speaking about the world of unsaved men. But not exclusively. In fact, we use it in our normal English in that same sense of Cosmic, meaning that it's universal in character. The word cosmic is derived from he Greek word [kosmos] or cosmos. Christ came to save all men of the world universally, not every man universally. Ergo, the whole world without distinction, not everyone in the world without exception. Even as I demonstrated, if world meant everyone, why would God sometimes use it in referring only to the Unsaved world? That usage would make no sense if "world" always meant every single person in the world.

We all know that most words have multiple meanings. Congratulations on finding that out about the Greek word "kosmos". But, understanding context is not your strong suit. Let's look at the context of the verse in question, shall we? We shall.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

What you miss is that verse 19 indicates that the world that God so loves includes the people who love darkness rather than the light that came into the world over those who love darkness. So, God loves all people, including those people who are in darkness and He gives all people the opportunity to embrace the light that He sent into the world of darkness rather than the darkness.

Jesus died for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:1-2). I'm sure you try to say the same thing about "the whole world" that you're saying about the world here. But, Peter indicated that the Lord didn't just pay the price for certain people, as you imagine, but even for the false teachers and prophets that he mentioned.

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

God is love (1 John 4:8), so it makes perfect sense that He would love all people and want all people to be saved and have eternal life. But, it also makes sense that He would not just force people to love Him back.

1st John 4:4-5

• "Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.
• They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them."

See? Them and us. This is the same Greek word [kosmos], and if it meant every single person in the world, it would have God speaking foolishness in terms of the people of the world versus us. Here, the unsaved are universally of the world, but not those who are of God. So clearly [kosmos] can't always mean every single person, but here it means a unsaved group universally.

LOL! When did I ever say that the Greek word kosmos has to always mean every person in the world? Never. So, nice straw man argument there, buddy. You can't get the time back that you wasted with this argument. The word kosmos doesn't have to mean every person in the world, but sometimes it does, like in John 3:16-19 and 1 John 2:1-2.

 

[PinSeeker]

Interesting...

Yep.

Yeah, so somehow you quoted me as saying, "I got nothin' to refute anything you said," but I never said anything of the sort. To anyone, much less you. Yeah, no idea who said that, just that it was not me. So... what was that you were saying about being dishonest? <smile>

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The rule for coming to sound exegesis of scripture is to never contradict "any" scripture. Scriptures don't Duel with each other, they are in harmony.

Yet, your Calvinist doctrine contradicts a great deal of scripture, as I've shown several times already. Your doctrine teaches that God is pleased to allow the wicked non-elect to die and experience eternal torment. But, scripture says that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked and wanted them to repent of their wicked ways instead (Ezekiel 18:23, Ezekiel 33:11).

As I showed in my previous post just prior to this one, God loves all people in the world including those who love darkness rather than the light that came into the world of those who love darkness. You try to say the world (Greek: kosmos) in John 3:16 doesn't include the unsaved, but John 3:19 shows that it does because that verse includes those who love darkness as being part of the world that God loves and sent the light into. And verses like 2 Peter 2:1 show that Jesus paid the price for the sins of the false teachers and false prophets that Peter said denied Him. God is love (1 John 4:8) and loves all people enough to send His Son to die for their sins in order to give them the opportunity of eternal life. But, God does not force Himself upon anyone. He wants people to willingly accept His free, gracious offer of eternal life.

Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Interesting...


Yeah, so somehow you quoted me as saying, "I got nothin' to refute anything you said," but I never said anything of the sort. To anyone, much less you.

And you quoted me as saying "Yada, yada. yada...". That gave me the impression that you're fine with that sort of thing. No?

Yeah, no idea who said that, just that it was not me. So... what was that you were saying about being dishonest? <smile>

Did I say "Yada yada. yada..." like you quoted me as saying?

 

[PinSeeker]

And you quoted me as saying "Yada, yada. yada...". That gave me the impression that you're fine with that sort of thing. No?

I mean, you can do what you want, for sure, but I don't think anyone is "okay" with being lied to or about... including you. But no reasonable person reading through our exchange would say I actually quoted you as saying "yada, yada, yada," and would understand clearly that I was just making a point about the... "stuff" <smile> ...that you actually did say previously. And you know that, so, you're lying again here...

Did I say "Yada yada. yada..." like you quoted me as saying?

Ah, you're nothing if not predictable... <chuckles> But in effect, yes.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[TribulationSigns]

LOL. This ought to be good. The guy who thinks Satan is not a real, living being is about to attempt to educate me. How interesting.

You keep clinging to the Satan issue as a shield because you’d rather dodge the truth than deal with it.

We all know that most words have multiple meanings. Congratulations on finding that out about the Greek word "kosmos". But, understanding context is not your strong suit. Let's look at the context of the verse in question, shall we? We shall.

Don’t patronize me. I know exactly what ‘kosmos’ means, and I stand by my post because it is truthful and rooted in context. The problem is not my understanding—it’s that your interpretation bends Scripture to fit your system instead of letting Scripture define itself.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

What you miss is that verse 19 indicates that the world that God so loves includes the people who love darkness rather than the light that came into the world over those who love darkness. So, God loves all people, including those people who are in darkness and He gives all people the opportunity to embrace the light that He sent into the world of darkness rather than the darkness.

You are twisting the passage by merging two very different uses of ‘world’ into one. John is clear—God’s love is manifested through Christ and applied only to those who believe, the elect. The very next verses prove this distinction: those who do not believe are already condemned. That is not God’s love; that is judgment. Verse 19 does not redefine God’s love as extending to the condemned—it explains why they remain condemned: they love darkness rather than light. To blur this distinction is to flatten the text and ignore the precision of Scripture.

Jesus died for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:1-2).

False. Christ died for the sins of HIS ELECT of the whole world. Not everyone in the world.

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Elementary move on your part. It may seems to you that this imply that false prophets were actually bought by the blood of Christ. The answer is that false prophets simply cannot be those who were purchased by the blood of Christ, so it's just your misunderstanding of the passage and why these are called those bought.

Romans 8:1

• "There is therefore now No Condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

False Prophets and false teachers who come into the church among us are NOT those who were purchased and redeemed by the blood of Christ, and who walk after the Spirit of God in the first place. They are just the opposite in being those who walk after the spirit of antichrist! You need to re-read the passage again CAREFULLY in context:

2nd Peter 2:1

• "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction."

It plainly says they are false prophets or teachers who come in among them. The "them" are those who were truly purchased by the blood of Christ, and the false prophets or teachers are those who come into the church claiming to be bought. The question is how were they spoken of as being bought, and the answer is in the context of them coming in among the church as those bought. For example, they were wolves in sheep's clothing. They are those "professing" to be bought as everyone else is in the church. The real problem is, does the word of God teach that Jesus Christ paid for (bought) all the sins of all men without exception, and thus redeemed these false teachers purchasing them also in His blood? And the biblical answer is an unequivocal, NO! Such an interpretation, like yours, is a blatant denial of the doctrines of grace, and clear support for the heretical teaching that we can be bought and then eventually lose our salvation by sinning. Any doctrine that claims that we can be bought and then lose our salvation by our bad works, is a doctrine of works, not of Grace. And as such, is your doctrine that will not stand!

God is love (1 John 4:8), so it makes perfect sense that He would love all people and want all people to be saved and have eternal life.
But, it also makes sense that He would not just force people to love Him back.

Wow! You are building a doctrine of sentimental human ‘love,’ not biblical love. Yes, God is love (1 John 4:8), but Scripture never says He loves every individual without distinction or that He is wringing His hands wishing all men would be saved. If that were true, then God’s will is weak and frustrated by man’s will—a blasphemous thought. The Bible says plainly: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ (Romans 9:13). Christ Himself declared, ‘I lay down My life for the sheep’—not for the goats (John 10:15). And Paul makes it clear that God ‘has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens’ (Romans 9:18). Your claim that God simply ‘won’t force people to love Him’ reduces the Almighty to a powerless beggar at man’s doorstep. That is not the God of Scripture. That is an idol of human imagination. Weak and hearsay interpreation on your part. LOL.

LOL! When did I ever say that the Greek word kosmos has to always mean every person in the world? Never.

Nice try, but you can’t wriggle out of your own words. You did argue that ‘kosmos’ in John 3:16 includes the unsaved—quoting verse 19 as your proof that even those who love darkness are part of the ‘world’ God loves. That is exactly the claim you now deny. Your own statement betrays you: ‘God is love and loves all people enough to send His Son to die for their sins in order to give them the opportunity of eternal life.’ That is universalism in disguise, and it is a lie. Scripture never says Christ died for ‘all people without exception.’ It says He laid down His life for His sheep (John 10:15), for His church (Ephesians 5:25), for the many (Mark 10:45)—not for those who remain condemned in unbelief. You twist ‘kosmos’ to fit your man-centered doctrine of a weak God begging for man’s love. The God of Scripture is sovereign—He saves His elect, and the rest remain condemned because they were never His. Stop pretending your position is biblical when it collapses under the weight of your own contradiction.

So, nice straw man argument there, buddy.

Its you who is a straw man, bud.

the word kosmos doesn't have to mean every person in the world, but sometimes it does, like in John 3:16-19 and 1 John 2:1-2.

Ah, I see—so ‘kosmos’ means whatever you need it to mean at the moment. Sometimes all people, sometimes just some people, depending on which way best props up your doctrine. That’s not exegesis—that’s a salad bar theology, where you pile your plate with whatever looks good and ignore the rest. Scripture doesn’t bend to your convenience. The word ‘kosmos’ must be understood by its context per my post, not by your selective appetite. You can’t keep changing the definition mid-argument and pretend you’re being faithful to the text...Ha!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There really is no middle ground. Either you believe in one, or you believe in the other. A comparison will show this clearly.

Calvinism and Arminianism comparison

All those who seek to compromise come up short.

I disagree with at least a couple things that are said on the Arminian side in that comparison. I don't know for sure if these things truly reflect Arminianism or not, but they don't reflect what I believe personally.

At the end of the first point of the "Five Points of Arminianism", it says "Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation.". That's not my understanding of faith. My understanding of faith is that it involves humbling oneself and acknowledging that he or she is a lost sinner and can't save him or herself while putting his or her trust in Christ to save them instead while submitting to Him as his or her Lord (Master, God). In my view faith is not something someone does to try to earn salvation, but rather something someone does to show they can't save themselves and need God to save them.

If a person is in an upper level of a building that is on fire and their only way out is to jump out of a window, but then a fireman on a firetruck ladder is brought up to them to give them a chance to be rescued, can it be said that the person's trust in the fireman is their gift to the fireman and their contribution to their rescue and physical salvation if they take the fireman's hand to be brought onto the ladder to be rescued? No, that's silly. All they did was take the fireman's hand, but the fireman is the one who made it possible for them to be saved and actually saved them. The person who was rescued can't take any credit in that case. This is how I understand faith and salvation, which, apparently, is different from Arminianism.

I also disagree with the last statement made under the second point of the five points of Arminianism (Conditional Election). It says "Thus the sinner's choice of Christ, not God's choice of the sinner, is the ultimate cause of salvation.". No, salvation is only possible because of what God did in the first place by sending His Son to die for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:1-2). So, the primary cause of salvation is Christ's death and resurrection. But, in order for what Jesus did to save someone, they must repent of the sins that Jesus died for in their place and put their trust in Him as their personal Lord and Savior. That doesn't mean they alone caused their salvation. They accepted what Jesus did to cause them to have the opportunity to be saved. Jesus did all the work. God requires man to accept what only Jesus could do.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I mean, you can do what you want, for sure, but I don't think anyone is "okay" with being lied to or about... including you. But no reasonable person reading through our exchange would say I actually quoted you as saying "yada, yada, yada," and would understand clearly that I was just making a point about the... "stuff" <smile> ...that you actually did say previously. And you know that, so, you're lying again here...

I'm lying about nothing. You quoted me with something I didn't actually say. I did the same in relation to you and you can't handle it. Stop being a hypocrite.

Ah, you're nothing if not predictable... <chuckles> But in effect, yes.

What I quoted you as saying is my understanding of what you had said, in effect, as well. But, your rules only apply to everyone else and not to yourself. You're hypocritical like that, as you've proven many times in the past as well.

 

[TribulationSigns]

I disagree with at least a couple things that are said on the Arminian side in that comparison. I don't know for sure if these things truly reflect Arminianism or not, but they don't reflect what I believe personally.

LOL.

Your personal disagreement is irrelevant to the issue. The Dutch Remonstrance (1610) is the formal articulation of Arminian theology, summarized in the Five Articles of Remonstrance. That is the historical and doctrinal standard, not individual opinion or improvised analogies such as the fireman illustration. Whether you accept or reject certain points does not alter the fact that Arminian doctrine as a system stands in opposition to the biblical witness. The issue is not your private variation, but the falsity of the Arminian framework itself.”

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You keep clinging to the Satan issue as a shield because you’d rather dodge the truth than deal with it.

I like to show people what kind of person they're dealing with when talking to you. When they know you believe something as ridiculous as that, they need to realize that they have to be careful about trusting anything you say. Not that literally everything you say is false, but rather everything you say should be highly questioned and no one should ever just take your word for anything.

Don’t patronize me.

I would if I wanted to since you cant tell me what to do, but I wasn't.

I know exactly what ‘kosmos’ means, and I stand by my post because it is truthful and rooted in context. The problem is not my understanding—it’s that your interpretation bends Scripture to fit your system instead of letting Scripture define itself.

You clearly don't take John 3:19 into account when interpreting John 3:16. The word "kosmos" means the same in both verses and in verse 19 the "kosmos" includes those who love darkness.

You are twisting the passage by merging two very different uses of ‘world’ into one.

Nope. There is no basis whatsoever for trying to say "the world" (kosmos) in John 3:19 is not the same as "the world" (kosmos) in John 3:16. Only doctrinal bias would cause someone to come to that conclusion.

John is clear—God’s love is manifested through Christ and applied only to those who believe, the elect. The very next verses prove this distinction: those who do not believe are already condemned. That is not God’s love; that is judgment. Verse 19 does not redefine God’s love as extending to the condemned—it explains why they remain condemned: they love darkness rather than light. To blur this distinction is to flatten the text and ignore the precision of Scripture.

John 3:19 says that the light came into the world. The same world that God so loved that He gave His only Son so that whoever in the world believes in Him would not perish, but have everlasting life. The way the light came into the world was by way of Christ and His gospel. The gospel is obviously not only preached those who accept it. Obviously, many who hear it reject it. You can't say that the light that came into the world did not come unto them. Of course it did. They are part of the world that the gospel is preached to. But, they rejected the light of Christ and the gospel in favor of darkness.

False. Christ died for the sins of HIS ELECT of the whole world. Not everyone in the world.

That's not what it says. You constantly ignore context. Look at the verses carefully for once.

1 John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Notice here that John said Jesus "is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world". Who was John talking about when he said "our" and "ours"? Those who believed and were saved. Christ's elect. But, he said Jesus is not the propitiation only for their sins, but also "of the whole world". So, He didn't sacrifice Himself just for certain people who are given faith, like you believe, but rather for everyone in the whole world. God wants all people to be saved, so it only follows that He would give all people the opportunity to be saved. And the way He did that is by sending His Son to the world that He so loved so that anyone in the world who believes in Him will not perish but have everlasting life.

Elementary move on your part.

Says the guy who makes almost nothing but elementary moves.

It may seems to you that this imply that false prophets were actually bought by the blood of Christ.

No, that's not what I'm saying. You need to stop arguing with your straw man. He paid the price for their sins so that they would have the opportunity to be saved, but they had to choose whether or not to accept what He did for them. In your view, isn't it God who brings destruction on the unsaved rather than them bringing it on themselves, as Peter said about those false teachers and false prophets? How can the unsaved bring destruction upon themselves if they have no choice and no say in the matter as it relates to salvation?

The answer is that false prophets simply cannot be those who were purchased by the blood of Christ, so it's just your misunderstanding of the passage and why these are called those bought.

Romans 8:1

• "There is therefore now No Condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

False Prophets and false teachers who come into the church among us are NOT those who were purchased and redeemed by the blood of Christ, and who walk after the Spirit of God in the first place. They are just the opposite in being those who walk after the spirit of antichrist! You need to re-read the passage again CAREFULLY in context:

2nd Peter 2:1

• "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction."

It plainly says they are false prophets or teachers who come in among them. The "them" are those who were truly purchased by the blood of Christ, and the false prophets or teachers are those who come into the church claiming to be bought. The question is how were they spoken of as being bought, and the answer is in the context of them coming in among the church as those bought. For example, they were wolves in sheep's clothing. They are those "professing" to be bought as everyone else is in the church. The real problem is, does the word of God teach that Jesus Christ paid for (bought) all the sins of all men without exception, and thus redeemed these false teachers purchasing them also in His blood? And the biblical answer is an unequivocal, NO! Such an interpretation, like yours, is a blatant denial of the doctrines of grace, and clear support for the heretical teaching that we can be bought and then eventually lose our salvation by sinning. Any doctrine that claims that we can be bought and then lose our salvation by our bad works, is a doctrine of works, not of Grace. And as such, is your doctrine that will not stand!

LOL! What a word salad this is! Hilarious! Read what you said here again for yourself and see if even you can make any sense of it. LOL! It does not say the false prophets and false teachers are those who only profess to be bought by the Lord! You are completely butchering the text. It says they deny the Lord, so why would you say they profess that He bought them? LOL! You are so tied to your false doctrine, that you will go to any length to defend it, including blatantly twisting the text to make it say what you want it to say. No, it does not say they professed that the Lord bought them, it says the Lord bought them, but they deny Him. No one who denies Him would profess that He bought them. And you talk about me needing to read the verse carefully? You clearly did not read it carefully at all.

Wow! You are building a doctrine of sentimental human ‘love,’ not biblical love. Yes, God is love (1 John 4:8), but Scripture never says He loves every individual without distinction or that He is wringing His hands wishing all men would be saved. If that were true, then God’s will is weak and frustrated by man’s will—a blasphemous thought.

Nonsense. You say "Yes, God is love" and then just gloss over that, as if it means nothing. Then you proceed to make up nonsense by acting as if God's will is weak just because He makes man responsible? What a joke. Would a God who is love have no love at all for most people? No way. How would that make any sense at all? That's ridiculous. It couldn't be said that He is love if he actually hates most people. Good grief. In your view, God is partially love, but mostly hate. If you only knew how badly you misrepresent God's character. It's sad to witness.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The Bible says plainly: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ (Romans 9:13).

LOL. You obviously don't know what that means. It has nothing to do with God hating Esau's soul, that's for sure. The context of that verse is in relation to the older serving the younger, which we can see in Genesis 25:23 has to do with the nations that would descend from Jacob and Esau. God blessed the nation that descended from Jacob (Israel) moreso than the nation that descended from Esau (Edom) because He chose to have salvation come from Jacob's line rather than Esau. That verse has nothing to do with Jacob and Esau as individuals.

Since you apparently think that the word hate always means the same thing, do you hate your family memebers and yourself as Jesus commanded?

Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

As you can see here, the word "hate" can be used in a relative sense rather than in the sense of being the opposite of love. That's how it is used in relation to Jacob and Esau and the nations that descended from them as well.

Christ Himself declared, ‘I lay down My life for the sheep’—not for the goats (John 10:15). And Paul makes it clear that God ‘has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens’ (Romans 9:18). Your claim that God simply ‘won’t force people to love Him’ reduces the Almighty to a powerless beggar at man’s doorstep. That is not the God of Scripture. That is an idol of human imagination. Weak and hearsay interpreation on your part. LOL.

Nice job of misrepresenting my view yet again with another straw man argument. My view absolutely does not portray God as "a powerless beggar at man's doorstep". What a joke. No, my view has God being a God who is love (1 John 4:8) and acting according to His character of being a God who is love by graciously offering salvation to all people. Not begging them powerlessly to accept it. You know you're desperate when you have to resort to misrepresenting my view like this.

As far as Jesus laying down His life for the sheep, of course we all know that the only ones who actually are saved by the blood of Christ are those who believe in Him and are His sheep. So, in that sense, He laid down His life for the sheep. But, that does not mean everyone else did not get the opportunity to be among His sheep. You are adding something to that verse beyond its context that Jesus was not saying.

I'll bring up the verse that you butchered horribly again. 2 Peter 2:1 indicates that He bought (paid the price for) the false teachers and prophets that Peter mentioned. He sacrificed Himself for all people, including them, but He does not force anyone to accept what He did for them. Why would He do that? You portray God as an insecure puppet master or robot programmer who has to have total control of everything.

Nice try, but you can’t wriggle out of your own words. You did argue that ‘kosmos’ in John 3:16 includes the unsaved—quoting verse 19 as your proof that even those who love darkness are part of the ‘world’ God loves. That is exactly the claim you now deny.

LOL. Your reading comprehension skills are terrible. I did not deny that after previously saying that. I stand by it now, too. What you are responding to here is my having said that the word "kosmos" does not always mean everyone in the world. And I said sometimes it does, as in the case of verses like John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2. But, here you are acting as if I said the word "kosmos" has to always mean everyone in the whole world despite my having explicitly said otherwise.

Your own statement betrays you: ‘God is love and loves all people enough to send His Son to die for their sins in order to give them the opportunity of eternal life.’ That is universalism in disguise, and it is a lie.

LOL. And, once again, you have misrepresented my view. It's all you have to offer. Giving people the opportunity for eternal life and requiring them to choose whether to believe in Christ or not is clearly not universalism at all. Universalism is the belief that all people are saved or eventually will be saved. Saying that people have a choice is far different than that as it's not reasonable to think that everyone would make the same choice, as would be the case if I was promoting universalism.

Ah, I see—so ‘kosmos’ means whatever you need it to mean at the moment. Sometimes all people, sometimes just some people, depending on which way best props up your doctrine.

Dude, are you for real? This is a serious question. How can you deny that the word "kosmos" has different meanings? It clearly does. Why do you deny things that are so clearly true? You apparently think that the word "kosmos" never means literally all people. Otherwise, I don't know why you're saying what you're saying here since what you are arguing against in relation to my understanding of verses like John 3:16 is that it's not talking about literally all people in the world.

So, let's see if the word "kosmos" is ever clearly used to refer to all people to the point where it's not even debatable. Just finding one such verse should suffice to prove the point even though there are more.

John 9:39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world (Greek: kosmos), that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.

In this verse the "kosmos" includes "they which see not" and "they which see", which obviously refers to spiritual sight rather than physical. What other category of people is there in this context besides "they which see not" and "they which see"? None, obviously. All people fit into one of those two categories, so the "kosmos" in this verse clearly refers to all people with some being "they which see not" and the rest being "they which see".

That’s not exegesis—that’s a salad bar theology, where you pile your plate with whatever looks good and ignore the rest. Scripture doesn’t bend to your convenience. The word ‘kosmos’ must be understood by its context per my post, not by your selective appetite. You can’t keep changing the definition mid-argument and pretend you’re being faithful to the text...Ha!

LOL. Your ignorance is truly amazing to witness. You are trying to argue that the word "kosmos" always means the same thing in every verse in which it is used when that is so clearly not the case. Unbelievable.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

LOL.

Your personal disagreement is irrelevant to the issue.

LOL. You are trying to put everyone into only those two groups as if everyone either agrees completely with one or the other. I showed otherwise, which is not irrelevant.

The Dutch Remonstrance (1610) is the formal articulation of Arminian theology, summarized in the Five Articles of Remonstrance. That is the historical and doctrinal standard, not individual opinion or improvised analogies such as the fireman illustration.

LOL. So what? You are trying to claim that everyone is either fully Calvinist or fully Arminian and I showed otherwise by showing how my view, which is clealry not Calvinist, does not agree with everything that was shown in relation to the five points of Arminianism. I couldn't care less about what was determined in 1610. That's completely besides the point I'm making. This is why you make so many straw man arguments when talking to me. You make assumptions about what I believe because of assuming I agree with literally everything about Arminianism instead of actually paying attention to what I believe personally and addressing that.

Whether you accept or reject certain points does not alter the fact that Arminian doctrine as a system stands in opposition to the biblical witness. The issue is not your private variation, but the falsity of the Arminian framework itself.”

LOL. My view obviously doesn't fully agree with "the Arminian framework itself", so what you're saying doesn't address what I believe personally. But, you'd rather try to force everyone into one of two boxes rather than making the effort to see what each person believes and addressing that.

 

[PinSeeker]

At the end of the first point of the "Five Points of Arminianism", it says "Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation."

Right, but this is not something Arminius actually said, but rather the unavoidable implication of what he did say regarding this "point," or rather, in this first objection of his. And now yours.

That's not my understanding of faith.

Well good, but it is the implication of your understanding.

My understanding of faith is that it involves humbling oneself and acknowledging that he or she is a lost sinner and can't save him or herself while putting his or her trust in Christ to save them instead while submitting to Him as his or her Lord (Master, God).

Having this faith is what causes... enables... us to in and of ourselves freely and willingly humble ourselves and acknowledge these things and put our trust in Christ. Having this assurance given to us ~ and this new spirit in us ~ is, again, what causes us to willingly humble ourselves and acknowledge these things and put our trust in Christ.

To what you say, here... Humbling oneself, and acknowledging those things and putting his or her trust in Christ and submitting to God, are things we do, Christians, anyway ~ and one is only a Christian if he or she is born again of the Spirit ~ and therefore works of man. And, as you agree (because you have agreed) faith is not a work of man, although somehow you refute your own assertion in saying faith is not the gift of God. Surely you see this inconsistency in your own thoughts and words.

In my view faith is not something someone does to try to earn salvation, but rather something someone does to show they can't save themselves and need God to save them.

And so, you believe that faith ~ which, yet again, by definition, is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1) ~ is... in your own words here... something someone does," which is to make it out to be a work of man, which is not the case, and even that is according your own words. So, you contradict yourself... again and again and again.

Have you ever read the verses after Hebrews 11:1?

<chuckles> Yes. <smile>

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Yes, we must have God's assurance and conviction by the Spirit ~ which can only come from this new spirit within ~ or we will never please Him. Without His assurance, we will never seek Him, because we think we already have everything we need. Without His assurance, our only desire will be to do Satan's will, as Jesus said. Yes.

If faith does not come from us and comes from God instead, then how can we please God with faith?

Our works, Spiritual Israelite, the things we do, are what come from us. And our works are only good in God's eyes ~ which is to say accepted by God ~ if we are in Christ, which we know is true because of this assurance that God has given us. We don't please God with faith ~ as if we are giving Him a gift ~ but rather through faith, which enables us to, in the words of Micah 6:8, "do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with God" ...causes us to want to do these things, to love Him and serve Him in these ways.

It's all about what God has done for us. I've never said otherwise.

Yet you continue to ~ inadvertently... you don't mean to, but you do ~ insinuate otherwise.

I also disagree with the last statement made under the second point of the five points of Arminianism (Conditional Election). It says "Thus the sinner's choice of Christ, not God's choice of the sinner, is the ultimate cause of salvation."

And in so doing, you at least inadvertently refute... all the passages of Scripture I noted in post #164.

...in order for what Jesus did to save someone, they must repent of the sins that Jesus died for in their place and put their trust in Him as their personal Lord and Savior.

Yes, but they will only do so if they have this new spirit, this "heart of flesh," which can only be given by God in the Person of the Holy Spirit... His work. And this is His salvific grace, His mercy and compassion, which He gives to some but not others. We are His workmanship. Thanks be to God.

That doesn't mean they alone caused their salvation. They accepted what Jesus did to cause them to have the opportunity to be saved.

And in saying this, you are attributing at least some small part of man's salvation to himself. Salvation is of God and God alone.

Jesus did all the work. God requires man to accept what only Jesus could do.

God requires man to walk in the light of what He has done for them. And the ones for whom this was... as been... done do so. We love because God first loved us (1 John 4:19).

I'm lying about nothing.

And now you're lying about lying...

You quoted me with something I didn't actually say.

I didn't; I was only making a point about what you did say. Which you know.

I did the same in relation to you...

You did not; what you did was quite different than what I did, even the opposite.

and you can't handle it. Stop being a hypocrite.

<chuckles>

What I quoted you as saying is my understanding of what you had said, in effect, as well.

Again, the opposite of what I said, which you knew, which undeniably means you were lying. It is absolutely true what they say: "Lies beget lies..." But by all means, keep going, if you so choose...

Grace and peace to you.