ARGH!!! Open Theism makes me furious!!!

[Sozo]

Jimbo:

This debate, between you and I has nothing to do with arriving at the truth, and you know it. You have decided to mince words, and pervert what I say, in order to defend godrulz (who must be your step-child, or something), because you don't like the fact that I insulted him for his heretical doctrines concerning the sufficiency of Christ's death for our sins. And since you could not find any error in my presentation of the gospel message, you decided to "pick" at more than just your nose.

You respond to portions of what I say, in an attempt to give the impression that you know what I believe. However, you ignore those things that I do, in fact, state to reveal your logical fallacies.

The wages of sin is death. ALL men are sinners, and ALL men are dead. Having your sins forgiven, will not save you. However, unless your sins are forgiven, you cannot be saved. The first thing that Jesus had to do, was to deal with the problem of sin. He therefore went to the cross and took our place, and our judgment for those sins, and more than cover them, He took them away, never to be seen again. He died for ALL sins, for ALL men, for ALL time. He also nailed to the cross the very thing that proved us guilty of sin, the Law.

"...we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son"

So, at this point, is anyone saved? Of course not. Does this make Christ death insufficient to save us? No, you would have to be a complete fool to think that. Jesus had to be raised from the dead.

"...if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins."

How can that be? (you might ask) If His death is what took our sins away and reconciled us to God, then why would anyone still have their sins, if Jesus was not raised?

Although, you have repeatedly attempted to separate the events, it is clear, from the above verse, that Jesus had to be raised in order for ALL sins to be forgiven, even though His death paid for the sins of the WHOLE world. This proves the point that I have made to you over & over again; Salvation is in Him.

God's plan, to save man, is more than just sending His Son to die.
His death paid for the sins of the entire world, and God was satisfied.

"He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world."

But, salvation (life) is in Him.

"He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life."

All men are dead, until they have life, and that life is in Christ.

"For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive."

God does not call us to come and receive forgiveness; He calls us to Christ.

" In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace, which He lavished upon us. In all wisdom and insight "

"Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins."

"For He delivered us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins."

"Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, and through Him everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses."

We recieve notice from God that Jesus has paid the price for our sins, but an exchange must take place. Redemption is in Him

"...for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus"

Therefore, it is in Him that we are saved; that is, in His life!

You cannot divide Christ's death, from His resurrection, in the plan of salvation. Both are required, and both are wholly sufficient in purpose.

"For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."

 

[natewood3]

This debate, between you and I has nothing to do with arriving at the truth, and you know it. You have decided to mince words, and pervert what I say...

This is sure getting old...people seem to very good at reading minds and motives, and they are always champs at expressing the love of which they are always speaking...

Sozo,

Your whole post to Jim is a strawman. You act as though Jim doesn't believe Christ had to be raised from the dead, which is ridiculous. The Gospel is the death, burial, AND resurrection. You don't have one without the other.

You quoted the following verse.

Paul teaches in Romans 5:10,

“For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.�

It could be not be more apparent and plain that all those who have been reconciled will be saved by His life. Once we are reconciled to God, then we have peace with God, and God does not impute our sins to us. Romans 4:8 states that “blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.� Therefore, we must conclude that Jesus Christ died and actually secured the reconciliation of the elect because all those reconciled through the death of Christ will be saved because Christ lives. We must also conclude that Christ did not die to effect reconciliation for the whole world, because if He did, then the whole world would be saved by His life.

You said:

Although, you have repeatedly attempted to separate the events, it is clear, from the above verse, that Jesus had to be raised in order for ALL sins to be forgiven, even though His death paid for the sins of the WHOLE world. This proves the point that I have made to you over & over again; Salvation is in Him.

You said above:

Having your sins forgiven, will not save you. However, unless your sins are forgiven, you cannot be saved.

Now, which is it? You say Christ had to be raised or we would still be in our sins (unforgiven), and you say that He had to be raised in order for ALL sins to be forgiven, but why does that matter? Our sins being forgiven is not what saves us,

God's plan, to save man, is more than just sending His Son to die.
His death paid for the sins of the entire world, and God was satisfied.

If God's wrath was satisified, you, as Hilston has already pointed out on numerous occasions, can make absolutely no sense of hell or judgment! What about this:

Col 3:5 Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.
Col 3:6 On account of these the wrath of God is coming.

Tell me Sozo, how can God's wrath come upon SINS if God's wrath has been totally satisfied?

Rev 6:15 Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains,
Rev 6:16 calling to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb,
Rev 6:17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?"

Why are they so terrified of the wrath of the Lamb? They want rocks to fall on them and crush their skulls so they do not have to face His wrath, but I thought His wrath was satisfied? I thought their sins were put away? You make little sense Sozo...at least those are my thoughts, and I am sure they mean absolutely nothing to you.

 

[godrulz]

Clete: I thought ostrich's put their heads in the sand, not camels?

Sozo: I did not think I was on Hilston's side. I thought he and I were disagreeing in many ways. I also thought I was taking your side on some matters.

Nate: You are correct to think we do not always understand each other's articulations.

Hilston: Open Theism has a spectrum of beliefs about redemption/sanctification. Its hallmark is more the relation of sovereignty to free will and the nature of God's experience of time/eternity. It looks at the nature of creation and whether the future is open or closed. It is a sub-type of Arminianism and would seem at odds with much of Calvinism.

Some here are influenced by Enyart. His book is more about Mid-Acts dispensationalism. He happens to have adopted some concepts that resonate with Open Theism, but he is not a known proponent of the Open View in academic circles compared to Boyd, Pinnock, Sanders, Haskers, Rice, Basinger, etc.

I am in the Open camp and have a Pentecostal view on sanctification. Gregory Boyd is an Open Theist, but he is a Baptist and would likely have a different view on some areas of sanctification. Pinnock is evangelical and a prominent Open Theist, but most of us would find some of his views questionable or heretical.


Open Theism does not have a well developed systematic theology on every doctrine. Most proponents are biblical, Protestant, evangelical, orthodox on the essentials. We just see that there are problems with the classical view of some of God's attributes based on scriptural and logical/philosophical considerations (e.g. nature of immutability, impassibility, omniscience, predestination, free will, etc.). There is a spectrum of beliefs within the Open View, depending on the individidual's previous background. We cannot stereotype all Calvinists (4 or 5 point, etc.), OT, or Arminians as believing the same thing.

Another problem is that some of us amateurs are misrepresenting the party line because we do not understand it or are adding our own speculations.

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by natewood3

Sozo,

Your whole post to Jim is a strawman.

No, it's the truth.

You act as though Jim doesn't believe Christ had to be raised from the dead, which is ridiculous.

No, I am presenting the evidence that Jim does not see that the death and resurrection are interrelated in securing salvation for those who believe, and that it is only available in His life.

The Gospel is the death, burial, AND resurrection. You don't have one without the other.

It is also the revelation of the righteousness of God.

It could be not be more apparent and plain that all those who have been reconciled will be saved by His life.

That's right, salvation is in His life.

Once we are reconciled to God, then we have peace with God, and God does not impute our sins to us.

Then we need to do what Paul begged us to do... "be reconciled"!

Romans 4:8 states that “blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.� Therefore, we must conclude that Jesus Christ died and actually secured the reconciliation of the elect because all those reconciled through the death of Christ will be saved because Christ lives.

Those who are reconciled have been elected to receive all that God has prepared.

We must also conclude that Christ did not die to effect reconciliation for the whole world, because if He did, then the whole world would be saved by His life.

Not true. Look at it this way... Let's say you and Jim are standing in front of Jesus. Jesus says to you that He has in His hand a key which represents the forgiveness of all your sins, and your reconciliation to God, which He just bought for the whole world. You say, "Wow, that's great!" Jesus now owns your forgiveness. Jesus takes the key and puts it in His mouth and swallows it. Forgiveness is now in Him. If you want to receive forgiveness, it is now in Him; in His life. If you want to be reconciled, you must receive His life. Sadly, you and Jim walk away, because you expected to get it because you thought you were special.

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by godrulz

Clete: I thought ostrich's put their heads in the sand, not camels?

:doh: :chuckle:

 

[natewood3]

Sozo,

No, it's the truth.

No, I am presenting the evidence that Jim does not see that the death and resurrection are interrelated in securing salvation for those who believe, and that it is only available in His life.

You are guilty of what you are accusing Jim of, namely, misrepresenting the view are you arguing against. You might think you are arguing against Jim, while in fact, you are arguing against a strawman that does not represent our view.

It is also the revelation of the righteousness of God.

I didn't say it didn't either...

I said: It could be not be more apparent and plain that all those who have been reconciled will be saved by His life.

Then you said:

That's right, salvation is in His life.

The point is that if all those who have been reconciled by His death WILL BE saved by His life. No dropouts.

Then we need to do what Paul begged us to do... "be reconciled"!

You said ealier that "He therefore went to the cross and took our place, and our judgment for those sins, and more than cover them, He took them away, never to be seen again. He died for ALL sins, for ALL men, for ALL time. He also nailed to the cross the very thing that proved us guilty of sin, the Law.' So are we reconciled or are we not Sozo?

Those who are reconciled have been elected to receive all that God has prepared.

So, Christ did not die for every single person in the world, as you have been saying, for not everyone is elected to receive all that God has prepared...

Not true. Look at it this way... Let's say you and Jim are standing in front of Jesus. Jesus says to you that He has in His hand a key which represents the forgiveness of all your sins, and your reconciliation to God, which He just bought for the whole world.

So tell me, if He bought reconcilation ON BEHALF OF all people, then all people are reconciled, right? If not, what good is this "buying" of reconcilation, which is no reconcilation at all?

You say, "Wow, that's great!" Jesus now owns your forgiveness.

You just said Jesus bought it for ALL the world, so how they they not own it now?

Jesus takes the key and puts it in His mouth and swallows it. Forgiveness is now in Him. If you want to receive forgiveness, it is now in Him; in His life. If you want to be reconciled, you must receive His life.

So, Jesus did not really BUY reconcilation through His death. He just made it available. If He really bought it for all people, then all people would own it, whether or not they know it or not. If they must accept it, then it is not ours until we fulfill a condition, which means it was not really ours and that Jesus didn't buy it for US, just whoever would fulfill the condition.

Sadly, you and Jim walk away, because you expected to get it because you thought you were special.

See what I mean? Strawman.....you obviously have no idea of what total depravity, election, effectual calling, or the death of Christ means in our view.

Now, just so you don't accuse either of us of something we do not believe, we both (I am sure Jim would totally agree with this) believe there are conditions to receiving forgiveness of sins. However, as Jim has pointed out earlier, this is a necessary result of what Christ did, not what makes the work of Christ effective. It is effective in and of itself, and if it is not, then it is of NO VALUE! Jesus purchased not only what I could not perform, but He also ensured that I would meet the conditions of receiving this salvation. Christ did not die for people who woul ultimately not be saved, otherwise, the death of Christ is useless in and of itself and has absolutely no power to save by itself. However, my views see Christ as coming and giving LIFE to all those given to Him by the Father, not every single person (John 17:2). God does not lose any, but all will be saved who Christ ransomed. It is inevitable.

 

[Sozo]

Sounds to me like Calvinism is just another word for Elite Universalists.

 

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Sozo

Jimbo:

This debate, between you and I has nothing to do with arriving at the truth, and you know it.

Why would you admit to such a thing? It certainly isn't the case from where I'm sitting. I'm asking a vitally important and truth-seeking question of whether or not Christ's work (birth, life, death, resurrection, ascension, etc.) was sufficient to save sinners. You say it was, yet your insistence on a D.I.Y. salvation crushes that claim under the sheer weight of its illogic.

Originally posted by Sozo
You have decided to mince words, and pervert what I say, in order to defend godrulz (who must be your step-child, or something), ...

There is very little, if anything, godrulz and I agree about with regard to the atonement. This is a paranoid delusion on your part.

Originally posted by Sozo
... because you don't like the fact that I insulted him for his heretical doctrines concerning the sufficiency of Christ's death for our sins.

Wrong. I don't like the fact that you accuse someone else of something you yourself are guilty. And you've proven it unequivocally in your responses. You claim that Jesus' provision must be appropriated by man's response before man can be saved. You thus make Christ's work insufficient to save. It's like a huge spread of food placed before a hungry person who doesn't want to eat. The provision cannot save him. He must save himself. That's your view of Jesus' work. Insufficient to actually save. You must save yourself. Prove that my logic is wrong.

Originally posted by Sozo
And since you could not find any error in my presentation of the gospel message, ...

"It's just a flesh wound!!!" Sozo, what's the gospel (good message)? Jesus has made a provision so you can save yourself? How can you deny this, based on what you've baldly stated?

Originally posted by Sozo
You respond to portions of what I say, in an attempt to give the impression that you know what I believe. However, you ignore those things that I do, in fact, state to reveal your logical fallacies.

Show me one.

Originally posted by Sozo
The wages of sin is death. ALL men are sinners, and ALL men are dead. Having your sins forgiven, will not save you. However, unless your sins are forgiven, you cannot be saved. The first thing that Jesus had to do, was to deal with the problem of sin. He therefore went to the cross and took our place, and our judgment for those sins, and more than cover them, He took them away, never to be seen again. He died for ALL sins, for ALL men, for ALL time. He also nailed to the cross the very thing that proved us guilty of sin, the Law. "...we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son." So, at this point, is anyone saved? Of course not. Does this make Christ death insufficient to save us? No, you would have to be a complete fool to think that. Jesus had to be raised from the dead.

Here is where your logic breaks down: As soon as you say that someone, even just one person, is in hell even though Christ's work was sufficient to save him, you've contradicted yourself. Maybe you don't know what sufficient means?

Originally posted by Sozo
"...if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins." How can that be? (you might ask) ...

I don't ask that. I understand the passage. My view is coherent in light of it. Yours is not.

Originally posted by Sozo
If His death is what took our sins away and reconciled us to God, then why would anyone still have their sins, if Jesus was not raised?

Because the resurrection is what affirms the Father's acceptance of the sacrifice.

Originally posted by Sozo
Although, you have repeatedly attempted to separate the events, ...

No, you've imagined that. I've been careful in recent posts to say "Christ's work," which would include every aspect of His obedience to the Father.

Originally posted by Sozo
... it is clear, from the above verse, that Jesus had to be raised in order for ALL sins to be forgiven, even though His death paid for the sins of the WHOLE world. This proves the point that I have made to you over & over again; Salvation is in Him.

I agree completely, although I define "all men" and the "whole world" differently than you do.

Originally posted by Sozo
God's plan, to save man, is more than just sending His Son to die.

Once again, you've contradicted yourself. If you were consistent, you would instead say: "God's plan, to make provision for men to save themselves, is more than just sending His Son to die."

Originally posted by Sozo
His death paid for the sins of the entire world, and God was satisfied.

God is not satisfied until man responds the right way. On your view, everything Christ did was not sufficient to finish the job. Salvation is incomplete until man chooses Christ's life, thereby saving himself. It's a D.I.Y. salvation. Why can't you admit that?

Originally posted by Sozo
"He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." But, salvation (life) is in Him. "He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." All men are dead, until they have life, and that life is in Christ.

You left out a step, according to your view: "All men are dead, until they save themselves ..."

Originally posted by Sozo
"For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive." God does not call us to come and receive forgiveness; He calls us to Christ. " In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace, which He lavished upon us. In all wisdom and insight " "Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins."
"For He delivered us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins." "Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, and through Him everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses."

And all of these things, on your view, are worthless and valueless to those who do not save themselves by availing themselves to it.

Originally posted by Sozo
We recieve notice from God that Jesus has paid the price for our sins, but an exchange must take place. Redemption is in Him

Actually, according to you, redemption is in Him, only if we first choose to save ourselves.

Originally posted by Sozo
"...for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus" Therefore, it is in Him that we are saved; that is, in His life!

But only if we first decide to save ourselves, according to your view.

Originally posted by Sozo
You cannot divide Christ's death, from His resurrection, in the plan of salvation. Both are required, and both are wholly sufficient in purpose.

I agree with statement. You, however, have just refuted yourself again. You used the word "sufficient." If, by "purpose," you mean "to make provision for men to save themselves," then you're being consistent. If, by "purpose," you mean "to save men from hell," then you've contradicted yourself. Because you've claimed that only those who are saved actually save themselves by choosing to accept Christ's provision.

Originally posted by Sozo
"For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."

This verse doesn't make sense according to your theology. It should say this: ""For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall save ourselves by trading our life for His."

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by natewood3

You are guilty of what you are accusing Jim of, namely, misrepresenting the view are you arguing against. You might think you are arguing against Jim, while in fact, you are arguing against a strawman that does not represent our view.

I believe that I understand that you believe that God picks who will believe.

The point is that if all those who have been reconciled by His death WILL BE saved by His life. No dropouts.

All those who will be reconciled, yes. God has removed all our sins in Him. If we are in Him, then we have the forgiveness of sins. As I have stated all along... Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. All the sins are forgiven, in Him. The penalty has been removed from man to Christ. However, everyone is still dead, as a result of that sin, and they need His life. Removing the sin, does not remove the result that came from that sin, which is death. In order to partake of the forgiveness and receive life, you must come to Christ.

You said ealier that "He therefore went to the cross and took our place, and our judgment for those sins, and more than cover them, He took them away, never to be seen again. He died for ALL sins, for ALL men, for ALL time. He also nailed to the cross the very thing that proved us guilty of sin, the Law.' So are we reconciled or are we not Sozo?

I am, are you?

So, Christ did not die for every single person in the world, as you have been saying

Yes, He did.

...for not everyone is elected to receive all that God has prepared...

Everyone who is reconciled.

So tell me, if He bought reconcilation ON BEHALF OF all people, then all people are reconciled, right?

Nope. If I have a birthday party for you, and you don't show up, there is still a party, which everyone who did show up, partakes in.

You just said Jesus bought it for ALL the world, so how they they not own it now?

He did pay for it, but He is the owner of the forgiveness. You still have to get it from Him.

So, Jesus did not really BUY reconcilation through His death.

Yes, He did.

If He really bought it for all people, then all people would own it, whether or not they know it or not.

Perhaps our undertandings of "bought" are different. I should have stayed with "paid for".

If they must accept it, then it is not ours until we fulfill a condition, which means it was not really ours and that Jesus didn't buy it for US, just whoever would fulfill the condition.

The gift is in Him. You must come to Him.

"But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name"

 

[drbrumley]

Hilston,

So are you saying Jesus died for all mankind and all mankind will be in heaven?

 

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Sozo
No, I am presenting the evidence that Jim does not see that the death and resurrection are interrelated in securing salvation for those who believe, and that it is only available in His life.

I fully agree. So much for your "evidence." The problem is, your view undermines that very statement.

Originally posted by Sozo
Look at it this way... Let's say you and Jim are standing in front of Jesus. Jesus says to you that He has in His hand a key which represents the forgiveness of all your sins, and your reconciliation to God, which He just bought for the whole world. You say, "Wow, that's great!" Jesus now owns your forgiveness. Jesus takes the key and puts it in His mouth and swallows it. Forgiveness is now in Him. If you want to receive forgiveness, it is now in Him; in His life. If you want to be reconciled, you must receive His life. Sadly, you and Jim walk away, because you expected to get it because you thought you were special.

So, on your view, we must save ourselves, right?

 

[drbrumley]

Originally posted by Hilston

So, on your view, we must save ourselves, right?

We have to make the decision to accept don't we?

 

[Sozo]

Jim... you are just a broken record of ignorance.

You must think that if you repeat a lie over & over again, that others will join you in your self-deception.

"Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.

"You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is these that bear witness of Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me, that you may have life."

I suppose that you have another strange Greek meaning that you would like to add to the word "come"

"For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me, unless it has been granted him from the Father."

"If any man is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink."

Therefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come. Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ, and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were entreating through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God."

If it is already done , as you erroneously suggest, then there is no need to request that anyone do anything. Paul is a fool, according to you.

Is it part of the Calvinist code for you to repeatedly tell people that you are not a Calvinist, until you have sucked them in? Is that what you also do when you claim to not be a Pastor?

"And he called for lights and rushed in and, trembling with fear, he fell down before Paul and Silas, and after he brought them out, he said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved, you and your household."

"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God."

"...God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Seems to me that if an elite group of special people are predestined, then God is wasting His desire, and He would already know whether or not they will come to the knowledge of the truth. Paul must have been out of his mind when he wrote that verse. Perhaps that explains you.

 

[drbrumley]

Sozo, keep em coming. I'm really enjoying reading your posts on this issue.

 

[Hilston]

Originally posted by drbrumley

Hilston,

So are you saying Jesus died for all mankind and all mankind will be in heaven?

No, Jesus died only for the elect. Only the members of the Body of Christ will be in heaven. The elect Jews and elect Gentiles of the kingdom will dwell on the earth in their respective lands forever.

Hilston asked: So, on your view, we must save ourselves, right?

Originally posted by drbrumley
We have to make the decision to accept don't we?

Is that a yes? If so, you're much more honest and consistent than Sozo and Clete.

 

[drbrumley]

Hilston,

Actually that was a question to you. And yes I believe we have to make a decision for or against Him..

Do you agree?

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by Hilston

The elect Jews and elect Gentiles of the kingdom will dwell on the earth in their respective lands forever.

For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

 

[Hilston]

Originally posted by Sozo

Jim... you are just a broken record of ignorance.

You must think that if you repeat a lie over & over again, that others will join you in your self-deception.

You can call it a lie all you want. You've yet to give a rational answer to your conundrum. You can't have a sufficient work of Christ for all men and have some of those men end up in hell. What is interesting to me is that, rather than admit that logical conclusion, you choose instead to quote verses that essentially say, given your presuppositions, that Christ's work was not sufficient. Watch:

"Come to Me [because My work is not intrinsically sufficient], all who are weary and heavy-laden, and [then, on that contingency] I will give you rest.

"You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is these that bear witness of Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me [which is prerequisite to having life, because My work was not sufficient], that you may have life."

The scriptures you quote and the commentary you offer prove how very little you even understand the charges against you. Why can't you admit what your theology so blatantly implies: Men must save themselves and Jesus' work was intrinsically insufficient to save them. You can't refute it. All you can do is quote verses out of context and eisegetically impose your irrational thesis upon them. Here's more:

"For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me [but come, you must, because My work is not sufficient to get the job done], unless it has been granted him from the Father."

"If any man is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink [and come, and drink, he must, because My work was not sufficient in itself to get the job done]."

"... Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were entreating through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God[because My work alone is not sufficient to reconcile you]."

You use each of those verses to prove that Christ's work was not sufficient. Prove me wrong.

Originally posted by Sozo
If it is already done , as you erroneously suggest, then there is no need to request that anyone do anything. Paul is a fool, according to you.

Not at all. The problem is that you don't understand the sufficiency of Christ's work, therefore, you're going into these verses with the wrong presuppositions (one of which is that it's OK to contradict yourself).

Another example:
"And he called for lights and rushed in and, trembling with fear, he fell down before Paul and Silas, and after he brought them out, he said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved [since the work of Christ is not sufficient]?" And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus [because the work of Christ is not sufficient], and you shall be saved, you and your household."

And other another:
"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that [partly] of yourselves [because Christ's work was not sufficient], it is the gift of God [that has a contingency of prerequisite action by sinner]."

And finally:
"...God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth [but actually did do quite enough to save them, since they must actually save themselves by accepting the provision of Christ's work]."

Originally posted by Sozo
Seems to me that if an elite group of special people are predestined, then God is wasting His desire, ...

No, because the "all men" of the aforementioned verse applies only to the elect. No waste. No losses. Total victory.

 

[Hilston]

Originally posted by drbrumley

Hilston,

Actually that was a question to you. And yes I believe we have to make a decision for or against Him..

Do you agree?

Yes, but not as a prerequisite to salvation. My view is that the work of Christ alone is sufficient to justify a man before God. No decision, no prayer, no accepting Jesus in your heart, no repentance, no faith, nothing is prerequisite to justification before God. Those things are requisite to justification before men and before oneself, but not before God. The only thing that justifies someone before God is the work of Christ, plus nothing.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Sozo

Sounds to me like Calvinism is just another word for Elite Universalists.

At least I am on your side against Calvinism