U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-23-2009, 01:57 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,295 posts, read 4,946,565 times
Reputation: 420

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
I think your concept of salvation is slightly skewed. What does salvation mean to you?
Really...I beg to differ..

Quote:
If the OT never taught the torture of hell.. why then do you suppose the NT is talking about salvation from torture of hell?
OT taught predominantly annihilation post torment and final judgement of the disobedient, but it also taught damnation and separation. You need to re-read the scriptures, or would you like that I post the plethora of them?

Quote:
Eternal life being the knowledge of God.. so isn't it true that salvation has to do with living in the knowledge of God?
Quote:
Universalism to me is the opportunity to take advantage of a long and prosperous life with knowledge of God.
I addressed 1 Tim 4 for you again..you can look in the other thread for it...I am sure you will find it....this knowledge of God has nothing to do with future application of mankind as a whole. That knowledge is already consummated and completed with the resurrection of the Dead and Living and the Parousia where Jew and Gentile are now in the body of Christ.. Once we enter the church, we are clothed with His presence.

Quote:
So what exactly do you suppose you are saved from?
Condemnation/Separation, Sin, and Death.

Think Golgotha, the Forsaken, and the Resurrection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-23-2009, 03:31 PM
 
2,945 posts, read 4,520,619 times
Reputation: 1597
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlabamaStorm View Post
The heresy of Arminianism and decisional regeneration is alive and well. You've declared the Arminian gospel as they did in Paul's day 2,000 years ago. However, the Gospel of Christ is a true Gospel that is not conditioned upon the sinner, but rather the work of Christ alone. This Gospel was given by revelation to Paul and is a glorious truth that declares to us that Christ died for our sins and was raised for our justification. Paul says to believe this Gospel and should anyone add to it they should be accursed.

The Arminian doctrine is a false Gospel that does not save. In fact it cannot, because it believes that Christ did not actually redeem the sinner nor that the sinners sins were forgiven. Further it denies that Christ was raised for our justification. Both of these denials of the truth are from the pagans of Rome trying to recover from the shinning light of the Protestant Reformation. Do not return to Rome my friends, trust in Jesus alone to save!

If nothing else is proclaimed on this board, know and believe that Christ alone was sufficient for your pardon at the cross. Know that God did in fact declare you the sinner justified in Christ's death and resurrection. You can believe the promises of God, they are true! Like Abraham, those that believe the promises of God are imputed with the righteousness of Christ. You either believe the Gospel or you do not. If you do not, repent and believe in the Gospel! Arminians never quote the Gospel because they do not actually believe it, so here it is once again:

1 Corinthians 15 1And I make known to you, brethren, the good news that I proclaimed to you, which also ye did receive, in which also ye have stood,
2through which also ye are being saved, in what words I proclaimed good news to you, if ye hold fast, except ye did believe in vain,
3for I delivered to you first, what also I did receive, that Christ died for our sins, according to the Writings,
4and that he was buried, and that he hath risen on the third day, according to the Writings,

The pagans of Rome also don't like to see these two scriptures one after the other, so I'll add it here too:

Romans 4:5 and to him who is not working, and is believing upon Him who is declaring righteous the impious, his faith is reckoned -- to righteousness:

Romans 4:25 who was delivered up because of our offences, and was raised up because of our being declared righteous.

Believe this Gospel. It is true!

Here is another thread that some might find of interest:
God's Simple Plan of Salvation
I believe it brother. I believe the good news! Thank God... Thank God!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:18 PM
 
Location: missouri
1,179 posts, read 1,098,629 times
Reputation: 151
There is no free will. There is what we call "will" (all reality is interpreted-free will is a psychological/sociological/philosophical concept brought in to christianity and these concepts have meant different things at different times and in different places-these are not static concepts; one would have to also see this concept in light of genetics, systems theory, sociology, education, etc {remember, the catholics announced this to be heretical at Augustine's time against the Palegian controversy; they must have changed their mind, again}). God chooses, and when he does, you then choose him (your will is made effectual by the grace; or, you now can "see") after being "informed" of the decision (Jesus says so, remember his response to Peter as to how he knew the christ? By the spirit, as no flesh and blood revealed it to him). Free will would need volition, or the power to effect the movement to be free; otherwise it only remains a possibility in mind. Once one sins, one is a slave to sin-that, sin, runs your will and limits your volition (all have gone asstray, their is none that do right, and the imaginings of man's heart is evil continually). Now if one in this condition could chose the god, then one would have to say that the state of "bondage to sin" with a mind only bent to evil is so free as to also be able to chose the good-when that is impossible-as it says. Because a "new birth" is involved, the fallen nature would then be actually a very high state of consciousness and would have to sacrifice itself (very christ like, don't you think? One is one's own christ?), meaning that it is not a slave to sin, as it would know the truth before the rebirth, which would imply that the new birth is really not needed (why would it be when one can freely will it from one's own fallen nature?). Further, free will implies that christianity is a gnosis, or just a bit of information like any other. One hears the information and decides one way or the other (this can not be or what would be the point of salvation?-all are damned from birth). This is very close to paganism (that is why this movement is heretical {free will}). The greeks attempted to account for knowing. The concept was that the idea is already in a person but they have forgotten it and one remembered through "recollection"; otherwise, how would one recognize the truth when he "saw" it, unless the truth was already in the man. This is similar to the lost person recognizing the truth of Jesus before the person lived in it (by new birth). Paul (and Job) are the models of salvation. One is walking along with his "free will" wanting to do something and then, wham, Jesus shows up and ruins it all. Jesus must be present for the salvation to take place (covered by "his" holy spirit), as he brings those whom the father has chosen (I am the way and the truth-you have none of this truth as being lost). There are some ways around this, of course. Catholics say that there is a remainder of "light" in the lost-this can get them over the hump and the bad will will sacrifice itself for the good will (this seems lame in the face of the verses I used above), methodists try and squeeze in a temporary gift of temporary grace to get one over the hump, but then one seems to have to answer for the needed "new birth" as the lost will is still making the decision or not (one may resist the news as god is powerless {or that really lame expression, god is a gentle*****-even though he gives his glory to no man!). Fundamentalists and free-willers hang it all on the person himself; at least they can blame people who refuse the truth! Most of this denies the fall (if you follow out the path of thought to its conclusion instead of believing mindlessly) and if there is no fall then the whole rebirth stuff is lame (its a good end run to lessen the importance of the christ and secularize the church). Jesus said that if he set a man free that man was free indeed (with the mind of christ, by the way, not a free one of you own). If you want the freedom before the new birth, you were not set free as no one comes to the father except by the Jesus guy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 01:49 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,430 posts, read 7,763,761 times
Reputation: 1678
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
Really...I beg to differ..



OT taught predominantly annihilation post torment and final judgement of the disobedient, but it also taught damnation and separation. You need to re-read the scriptures, or would you like that I post the plethora of them?
The OT did not teach annihilation unless you consider being asleep without waking annihilation.

Dr. James Tabor describes it as:

"All the dead go down to Sheol, and there they lie in sleep togetherĖwhether good or evil, rich or poor, slave or free (Job 3:11-19). It is described as a region "dark and deep," "the Pit," and "the land of forgetfulness," cut off from both God and human life above (Pss. 6:5; 88:3-12). Though in some texts Yahweh's power can reach down to Sheol (Ps. 139:8), the dominant idea is that the dead are abandoned forever. This idea of Sheol is negative in contrast to the world of life and light above, but there is no idea of judgment or of reward and punishment. If one faces extreme circumstances of suffering in the realm of the living above, as did Job, it can even be seen as a welcome relief from painĖsee the third chapter of Job. But basically it is a kind of "nothingness," an existence that is barely existence at all, in which a "shadow" or "shade" of the former self survives (Ps. 88:10). "

There was no separation of souls. Whatever went on in this life on earth had no effect on the afterlife. That is what they believed.

On the other hand, the opposite of the OT understanding was that all men went to the heavenly realm to be with God. This is what Jesus taught, IMO.



Quote:
I addressed 1 Tim 4 for you again..you can look in the other thread for it...I am sure you will find it....this knowledge of God has nothing to do with future application of mankind as a whole. That knowledge is already consummated and completed with the resurrection of the Dead and Living and the Parousia where Jew and Gentile are now in the body of Christ.. Once we enter the church, we are clothed with His presence.
If the whole nation of Israel expected to go "down" to sheol to sleep and Jesus told them that was not true, in fact there would be a resurrection of souls to heaven.. what do you think that means? Was Jesus declaring a truth that had always existed but people had the wrong idea?

or was Jesus teaching a change in the way God dealt with the afterlife?

I believe the truth had always existed (God never changes and his plan was the same in the beginning). The truth was something the Israelites knew but never could understand.

Quote:
Condemnation/Separation, Sin, and Death.

Think Golgotha, the Forsaken, and the Resurrection.
Can you show me a few verses in the OT that teach punishment for sin after death... Isn't the glorious hope that souls would now be rescued from sheol and brought into heaven?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 02:15 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,295 posts, read 4,946,565 times
Reputation: 420
Katonjj,

My studies on Romans 5 will show you that all men, that is all mankind, regardless of faith, will not enter the kingdom of Heaven. Yo must be part of the church. And to answer your question:

Quote:
or was Jesus teaching a change in the way God dealt with the afterlife?
Yes...the sole reason for the ROTD and Living, and the New Heavens and Earth. Hades was no more.
Neither was Sin or Death.

Universalism take Adam’s death universally applied to all men, random pagan biologically derived Gentiles that Paul is speaking of in Rom chapter 5.

Sin entered the world.

Adam's nature became corrupt and he passed this nature on to all men. That corrupt nature is called "Original Sin." So, all men are born with a sinful nature.

Death came by sin.

Through Adam's personal sin, original sin came to all mankind, and all humanity was corrupted. We are all born in a state of spiritual death. If a man dies physically while in a state of spiritual death, he will spend eternity in the lake of fire, which the Bible calls the "second death".

Death spread to all men.

Every human being born is born separated from God, dead in sin. All men are born dead in sin because Adam's personal sin is "imputed," that is put to the account of, every individual in Adam's race. When Adam sinned, he sinned as our Federal or representative head. Adam's sin applies to and affects every individual that he was representing.

Romans 5, is a comparison of two men, Adam and Christ. The comparison is very simple. There are two men, who each performed a single act, that brought forth a single result, and the result is experienced by every member in their respective races.

Each federal head, Adam and Christ, committed an act which has a result that is experienced by every individual in their respective race. Every individual in their respective race participated in that act which their representative head performed. This is fundamental to understanding of the following chapter in Romans 6.

Many & All....The case of Universalism refuted.

In verses Rom 5:15 and Rom 5:19, Paul uses "many" for the sake of his analogy, and in verse 18, he uses "all" for the sake of analogy.

Which is it, many or all?

In verse 15, he uses "many" though he means: "all." And when he says "many in Christ," he means: "many" not "all". Later on he'll say "all" in Christ because he said "all" in Adam. "All" in Adam means: "all", but "all" in Christ means: "many" not "all".

Got that? Good, let's move on.

Just kidding, let's see if we can understand this

There are people who say that "many and all" mean exactly what they say, and if it means "many" in one place then it means "many" in the other place. This sheer literalism results in universalism, which means: "everybody will be saved."

In comes the UR theology.....but wait!

Romans 5:18 (NKJV) Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

Is this teaching universalism? Will everybody be saved?

NO!

Often in Scripture the term "all" has a limited meaning.

For example:

Luke 2:1 (NKJV) And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.

Was every single person living in the world to be registered? No.

John 3:26 (NKJV) And they came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified; behold, He is baptizing, and all are coming to Him!"

Was everyone coming to Christ? No.

Acts 19:27 (NKJV) "So not only is this trade of ours in danger of falling into disrepute, but also the temple of the great goddess Diana may be despised and her magnificence destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worship."

Was everyone in the world worshiping Diana?
No, there were many Christians at this time, and they weren't worshiping her.

The "all" of verse 18 is limited in verse 17 to those who "receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness." The "all" refers to all who are under the headship of that representative.

Look with me at:

1 Corinthians 15:22 (NKJV) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.

Everyone does die in Adam, but are "all" made alive in Christ?
Verse 22 "all" is limited in verse 1 Cor 15:23.

1 Corinthians 15:23 (NKJV) But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ's at His coming.

It is only "those who are Christ's" that are made alive. The "all" is for all whom they represent. Adam does represent all men. But Christ only represents "all" who put their trust in Him.

Our main hermeneutical principle is applied here This is the principle that teaches Scripture is to interpret Scripture. No Scripture can be taken in such a way as to render it in conflict with what is clearly taught elsewhere in Scripture.
Sola Scriptura we say!

Does the Bible teach universalism? No!

John 5:27-29 (NKJV) "and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man. 28 "Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 "and come forth; those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

Matthew 25:46 (NKJV) "And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

The Bible clearly teaches that not all men will be saved.
"Many and all" are used for the sake of analogy.

So, in verse Rom 5:15, Adam's offense is contrasted to Christ's free gift. Then in Rom 5:16, The extent of Adam's sin is contrasted with the extent of Christ's obedience.

Romans 5:16 (NKJV) And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification.

Adam's sin resulted in judgment. The word "judgment" means: "a sentence or decision on the part of a judge." This judgment came as a result of one offense.

Here it is asserted that condemnation has come by the one sin of the one man. If then all are condemned by that sin, all must be guilty by it, because the Righteous Judge would not condemn the innocent.

On the one side, the one sin of Adam led to condemnation of the whole world, and on the other side, the many offenses are covered by the act of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Side note again:
How many sins did it take for God to condemn the whole human race?

One.

What does that tell you about God's attitude toward sin? One sin, and the whole race is damned. God hates sin, and He has't changed. Just one sin, and everybody dies. This is serious judgment.

In verse 17, the two reigns are again contrasted.

Romans 5:17 (NKJV) For if by the one man's offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.

Again the stress falls upon the one man. One man, one sin results in death reigning. Death came in as a conqueror, death triumphed over all. And so the whole of mankind, as the result of this one sin of Adam, has been subject to death.

Look at our world, and you can clearly see the reign of spiritual death.
Men are separated from God.

"Much more" - the reign of death is certain. Just as certain as death reigns through Adam, "much more" certain is the fact that we reign in life through Jesus Christ.

"Those who receive" - does not mean "accepted", but those who were made recipients of - "abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness" God's righteousness is given to us as a gift of his grace.

Adam lost his own righteousness, but you and I are not merely given back a human righteousness, we are given the very righteousness of God because we are in Christ.
I stand before God perfectly righteousness, totally obedient, never having sinned, by the blood of Jesus Christ is clothed on me like a white Robe, a heavenly tabernacle not made with hands. Because of the ROTD and Living, that Parousia, that presence is forever with me and you, those in Christ.

"will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ" - what does this mean?

Ephesians 2:4-6 (NKJV) But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus

We reign in life, and eternal life.
We reign in life as kings inheriting all of God's promises.
This is what I teach.
I came to Preterism via the scriptures, not the minds of men. I had never heard of Preterism until someone accused it of me on another board that I was eventually kicked off. I reign with Him now, I am a priest for Him now, I am a king with him now. He has clothed me, and you, and everyone else in the faith now.

John 10:10 (NKJV) "The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.

John 11:26 (NKJV) "And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?"

Spiritual death cannot touch the church, it reigns in life, and only those that enter into the church are reconciled to God, and He becomes all in all with His people, Zion, the Holy and Spiritual City, the New Jerusalem.

Those that teach Universalism have erred in a not so simple area of scripture, because they have failed, like every other eschatological view has, but the scripture remains the same as God is was and always will be, as Christ is, was and always will be......the Alpha and Omega. Universalism has literalized an area of scripture that directs it attention toward those that receive CHrist for that free gift that was offered to them, and applies it to all mankind because Adam sinned for all mankind. The whole purpose of that reconciliation is to bring His people back to Him, but the people must come back to Him, and that is where Universalism fails and applies their Platonic, gnostic idealism and account it for every man who is reconciled, when it is only the man that accepts his sin in Adam, turns from it, and turns to God, in order to be reconciled back to Him and into the church, that was freely given by our Lord Jesus Christ, once, one time, and for all time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,430 posts, read 7,763,761 times
Reputation: 1678
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
Katonjj,

My studies on Romans 5 will show you that all men, that is all mankind, regardless of faith, will not enter the kingdom of Heaven. Yo must be part of the church. And to answer your question:



Yes...the sole reason for the ROTD and Living, and the New Heavens and Earth. Hades was no more.
Neither was Sin or Death.
So you are saying that the word of God did not exist from the beginning but that he changed the Word spoken to Abraham, Moses, etc. through Jesus? I thought God never changes....

Quote:
Universalism take Adamís death universally applied to all men, random pagan biologically derived Gentiles that Paul is speaking of in Rom chapter 5.
HUH? Universalism states that through Adam all men die and through Christ all are made alive. Adam didn't die the moment he ate the fruit.. it was a spiritual death, right? But yet he did decay. Jesus taught that through him a relationship with God can be established and the spiritual death wouldn't happen and decay would be averted for a long time. Right?

Quote:
Sin entered the world.

Adam's nature became corrupt and he passed this nature on to all men. That corrupt nature is called "Original Sin." So, all men are born with a sinful nature.
Tendency to sin originated before the fruit was eaten because there had to be a sin nature in order for them to sin by eating the fruit. I think you miss the point of the story there.

Quote:
Death came by sin.

Through Adam's personal sin, original sin came to all mankind, and all humanity was corrupted. We are all born in a state of spiritual death. If a man dies physically while in a state of spiritual death, he will spend eternity in the lake of fire, which the Bible calls the "second death".
This is neither scriptural or reality. We are not born in a state of spiritual death. That would mean that all babies who die after birth are annihilated and spend eternity in the lake of fire... is that what you think?

Quote:
Death spread to all men.

Every human being born is born separated from God, dead in sin. All men are born dead in sin because Adam's personal sin is "imputed," that is put to the account of, every individual in Adam's race. When Adam sinned, he sinned as our Federal or representative head. Adam's sin applies to and affects every individual that he was representing.
One cannot be born into sin.. one sins when one is cognitive of the sin. I think that your understanding of "original sin" is not biblical at all. Perhaps you can point me to the teacher of these things so I can understand where you are coming from.

Quote:
Romans 5, is a comparison of two men, Adam and Christ. The comparison is very simple. There are two men, who each performed a single act, that brought forth a single result, and the result is experienced by every member in their respective races.
Yet you complicate it.. just reread the above statements you make...

Quote:
Each federal head, Adam and Christ, committed an act which has a result that is experienced by every individual in their respective race. Every individual in their respective race participated in that act which their representative head performed. This is fundamental to understanding of the following chapter in Romans 6.

Many & All....The case of Universalism refuted.
Yet you have now created so many contradictions in scripture that you would have to be Houdini to get them all straight.
Quote:
In verses Rom 5:15 and Rom 5:19, Paul uses "many" for the sake of his analogy, and in verse 18, he uses "all" for the sake of analogy.

Which is it, many or all?

In verse 15, he uses "many" though he means: "all." And when he says "many in Christ," he means: "many" not "all". Later on he'll say "all" in Christ because he said "all" in Adam. "All" in Adam means: "all", but "all" in Christ means: "many" not "all".
If I like all but I have many favorites that doesn't exclude all... Here again you are making an exclusion based on the use of a word. Many does not exclude all...


Quote:
There are people who say that "many and all" mean exactly what they say, and if it means "many" in one place then it means "many" in the other place. This sheer literalism results in universalism, which means: "everybody will be saved."

In comes the UR theology.....but wait!

Romans 5:18 (NKJV) Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

Is this teaching universalism? Will everybody be saved?
Often in Scripture the term "all" has a limited meaning.

For example:

Luke 2:1 (NKJV) And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.

Was every single person living in the world to be registered? No.

John 3:26 (NKJV) And they came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified; behold, He is baptizing, and all are coming to Him!"

Was everyone coming to Christ? No.

Acts 19:27 (NKJV) "So not only is this trade of ours in danger of falling into disrepute, but also the temple of the great goddess Diana may be despised and her magnificence destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worship."

Was everyone in the world worshiping Diana?
No, there were many Christians at this time, and they weren't worshiping her.

NO!
You are right that the word for all used is an open "all", in that it includes and excludes at the same time when used in context. For example, in Matt. 4:24 they brought to Jesus ALL that were sick. We know he heals others later so ALL in that context means all that they brought not all that were sick everywhere.

So then if you look at the context of the verses you refute:

Romans 5:
15But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did Godís grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!


We know that the grace is overflowing past the one trespass. One man plus one (at least) receive the grace of God and the gift, and the grace of a man....



16Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one manís sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.


He repeats that the gift is not equal to the many trespasses.. it is more.



17For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive Godís abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.



Death in the trespass (through Adam) is contrasted to reigning in life (through Christ).



18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.


So if the result of the ONE trespass is condemnation for ALL men ALSO the result of ONE brings life (reigning in life) to ALL men. This is again more than the one and more than the many.



19For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

The amounts are equal. The all encompasses the one and the many.


Quote:
The "all" of verse 18 is limited in verse 17 to those who "receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness." The "all" refers to all who are under the headship of that representative.

Look with me at:

1 Corinthians 15:22 (NKJV) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.

Everyone does die in Adam, but are "all" made alive in Christ?
Verse 22 "all" is limited in verse 1 Cor 15:23.
You are saying he said all die in Adam but not all just many are made alive in Christ?

That makes no sense to me.

If he is directly contrasting the two parties: in Adam and in Christ, then why would he mean all for the in Adam group and many for the in Christ group?

Quote:
1 Corinthians 15:23 (NKJV) But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ's at His coming.

It is only "those who are Christ's" that are made alive. The "all" is for all whom they represent. Adam does represent all men. But Christ only represents "all" who put their trust in Him.
This is a spiritual regeneration remember? Alive in Christ.. are you physically alive in Christ or spiritually alive in Christ?

[/quote]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2009, 11:06 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,295 posts, read 4,946,565 times
Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
So you are saying that the word of God did not exist from the beginning but that he changed the Word spoken to Abraham, Moses, etc. through Jesus? I thought God never changes....
Did I say that? No I didn't...I said Hades was tossed, and the New Heaven and New Earth was realized.

Quote:
Adam didn't die the moment he ate the fruit.. it was a spiritual death, right?
Yes.

Quote:
But yet he did decay.
Of course...he grew older didn't he?

Quote:
Jesus taught that through him a relationship with God can be established and the spiritual death wouldn't happen and decay would be averted for a long time. Right?
Yes, for those in Christ till 70 AD when the ROTD and Living, the Parousia took place...now when you come in to the faith, that Parousia, the white robe and heavenly tabernacle clothes you, and you, in God's eyes...are sinless..You still sin, but you can can come to God, any time, anywhere and have communion with Him, and He will listen. You are now, part of the Corporate Body of Christ.

Check out material on the Corporate Body View....you should if you are a Full Preterist.

Quote:
Tendency to sin originated before the fruit was eaten because there had to be a sin nature in order for them to sin by eating the fruit. I think you miss the point of the story there.
No..never missed it...and I agree. Sin nature was there, the whole purpose for the history of God working with mankind until Christ.

Quote:
We are not born in a state of spiritual death.
Yes we are. Or do you believe that we are already considered righteous at birth? This is where you err I believe. Man is sinful by nature. Christ redeemed that, but only through His people...Zion...True Israel.

The rest...die.

Quote:
That would mean that all babies who die after birth are annihilated and spend eternity in the lake of fire... is that what you think?
No. Babies don't understand awareness of the circumcision imputed of the heart and have not received the gospel, therefore cannot reject it. You have not studied you epistles have you now?

Quote:
One cannot be born into sin.
Again you err here. Adam sinned, therefore all mankind is in sin. In Christ, those in Christ, that have received the gospel, believed it to be true, accepted Christ as their Savior, are redeemed from that.

Quote:
Perhaps you can point me to the teacher of these things so I can understand where you are coming from.
I am a protestant...reformed Full Preterist and Calvinist and I abide to predominantly all of the WCF except for the prophetic directives of the second coming and the ROTD and living to future fulfillment...because I am Full Preterist...read up on them if you like.

Quote:
Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man’s sin:
Yes it is...Romans 5 and 6. because of that one man's sin, CHrist had to come to redeem that in His faithful people...so that they could be all in all with Him.

Quote:
The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation,
Yes.

Quote:
but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.
No. The justification redeemed that one sin. The law was put into place so that man could be "aware" of his sin(s), not to make him righteous.

Death was the result of that one sin, and life was the result of Christ's blood.

Quote:
You are saying he said all die in Adam but not all just many are made alive in Christ?
Yes...not all men are made alive, that is people that don't believe, but only people that do. The gift is free, but if you don't take that gift, how can you use it...you cannot.

Quote:
If he is directly contrasting the two parties: in Adam and in Christ, then why would he mean all for the in Adam group and many for the in Christ group?
Because he is being harmonious with the scripture....many come, but few enter.

Quote:
This is a spiritual regeneration remember? Alive in Christ.. are you physically alive in Christ or spiritually alive in Christ?
You have to be quickened, regenerated to be alive don't you?

That's a question for you.

Or are you just regenerated without that regeneration?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2009, 01:18 AM
 
2,945 posts, read 4,520,619 times
Reputation: 1597
Quote:
Originally Posted by allen antrim View Post
There is no free will. There is what we call "will" (all reality is interpreted-free will is a psychological/sociological/philosophical concept brought in to christianity and these concepts have meant different things at different times and in different places-these are not static concepts; one would have to also see this concept in light of genetics, systems theory, sociology, education, etc {remember, the catholics announced this to be heretical at Augustine's time against the Palegian controversy; they must have changed their mind, again}). God chooses, and when he does, you then choose him (your will is made effectual by the grace; or, you now can "see") after being "informed" of the decision (Jesus says so, remember his response to Peter as to how he knew the christ? By the spirit, as no flesh and blood revealed it to him). Free will would need volition, or the power to effect the movement to be free; otherwise it only remains a possibility in mind. Once one sins, one is a slave to sin-that, sin, runs your will and limits your volition (all have gone asstray, their is none that do right, and the imaginings of man's heart is evil continually). Now if one in this condition could chose the god, then one would have to say that the state of "bondage to sin" with a mind only bent to evil is so free as to also be able to chose the good-when that is impossible-as it says. Because a "new birth" is involved, the fallen nature would then be actually a very high state of consciousness and would have to sacrifice itself (very christ like, don't you think? One is one's own christ?), meaning that it is not a slave to sin, as it would know the truth before the rebirth, which would imply that the new birth is really not needed (why would it be when one can freely will it from one's own fallen nature?). Further, free will implies that christianity is a gnosis, or just a bit of information like any other. One hears the information and decides one way or the other (this can not be or what would be the point of salvation?-all are damned from birth). This is very close to paganism (that is why this movement is heretical {free will}). The greeks attempted to account for knowing. The concept was that the idea is already in a person but they have forgotten it and one remembered through "recollection"; otherwise, how would one recognize the truth when he "saw" it, unless the truth was already in the man. This is similar to the lost person recognizing the truth of Jesus before the person lived in it (by new birth). Paul (and Job) are the models of salvation. One is walking along with his "free will" wanting to do something and then, wham, Jesus shows up and ruins it all. Jesus must be present for the salvation to take place (covered by "his" holy spirit), as he brings those whom the father has chosen (I am the way and the truth-you have none of this truth as being lost). There are some ways around this, of course. Catholics say that there is a remainder of "light" in the lost-this can get them over the hump and the bad will will sacrifice itself for the good will (this seems lame in the face of the verses I used above), methodists try and squeeze in a temporary gift of temporary grace to get one over the hump, but then one seems to have to answer for the needed "new birth" as the lost will is still making the decision or not (one may resist the news as god is powerless {or that really lame expression, god is a gentle*****-even though he gives his glory to no man!). Fundamentalists and free-willers hang it all on the person himself; at least they can blame people who refuse the truth! Most of this denies the fall (if you follow out the path of thought to its conclusion instead of believing mindlessly) and if there is no fall then the whole rebirth stuff is lame (its a good end run to lessen the importance of the christ and secularize the church). Jesus said that if he set a man free that man was free indeed (with the mind of christ, by the way, not a free one of you own). If you want the freedom before the new birth, you were not set free as no one comes to the father except by the Jesus guy.
Excellent post, allen. I totally agree. But most cannot grasp this. They like the idea of being in control and making their own decisions. They are under the arrogant illusion that they are in control and not God!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2009, 11:25 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,295 posts, read 4,946,565 times
Reputation: 420
I. God has endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that is neither forced, nor, by any absolute necessity of nature, determined good, or evil

II. Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom, and power to will and to do that which was good and well pleasing to God; but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it.

III. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, has wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good,and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.

IV. When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, He frees him from his natural bondage under sin;and, by His grace alone, enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good;yet so, as that by reason of his remaining corruption, he does not perfectly, or only, will that which is good, but does also will that which is evil.

V. The will of man is made perfectly and immutably free to do good alone in the state of glory only.

Otherwise there is no purpose for worship and we are all just robots.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2009, 07:44 PM
 
34,474 posts, read 22,123,881 times
Reputation: 5566
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
I. God has endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that is neither forced, nor, by any absolute necessity of nature, determined good, or evil

II. Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom, and power to will and to do that which was good and well pleasing to God; but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it.

III. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, has wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good,and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.

IV. When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, He frees him from his natural bondage under sin;and, by His grace alone, enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good;yet so, as that by reason of his remaining corruption, he does not perfectly, or only, will that which is good, but does also will that which is evil.

V. The will of man is made perfectly and immutably free to do good alone in the state of glory only.

Otherwise there is no purpose for worship and we are all just robots.
You are deceived by appeals to your desire to be one of the "special" people" . . . the "God picked you for His team" idea can be irresistible. If you ignore "free will and Dominion" as the express and unrevokable Will of God . . . then Calvinistic nonsense just seems more GODLY . . . than allowing us to make such a mess of our llives and the world. The total responsibility without an accompanying total power is not "fair."

Unfortunately . . . the Calvinist alternative does run afoul of the underlined portion of sciota's bolded statement above. This requires maintaining belief that He is an egotistical God who can be appeased by worship and obeisance acknowledging His awesome Godliness and "giving Him glory." This reduces our responsibility in this life to "brown-nosing" sufficiently to become one of His special supplicants and sycophants . . eminently more "doable" than actually trying to be more righteous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top