Christian Readers discussion
Scripture Memorization
>
Who's sins did Jesus die for? Who benefits from His sacrifice?
Mod
God's Word says...
Job 28:24 - "For he looks to the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens."
1 John 3:20 - "For whenever our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything ."
So who should we believe? God or Rod?
That isn't God's Word. It's a dictionary definition being read into His Word. To fore know and to fore see can be 2 very different things. Don't get caught up in terms. Let the Bible describe these words in actions and context.
Mod
My response: God foreknew EVERYTHING! That is what!
Now please answer what it is that you think He does NOT foreknow?
It seems obvious that you think I am missing something... you keep rejecting my answer and trying to get me to say something different.
Why?
Also, do you agree with Rod that God does NOT know everything? Rod says God is NOT omniscient... are you in agreement with Rod on that?
You do know that Catholics basically do the same thing as you - that is how they got from Peter to the Popes.They failed to read and apply all of scripture.
Of course God knew beforehand--- it was HIS plan.
Mod
My response: LOL!!!!! So you claim superiority over Greek scholars? Do you believe God did NOT protect His word? On what basis should anyone believe YOUR definition over that of scholars?
Robert wrote: "God foreknew EVERYTHING! That is what!"
I'm glad you believe that. Since you do you should be able to actually answer my question, you say the elect are those God foreknew, foreknew what?
If you're asserting that the elect, that you say God "foreknew" means He knows everything regarding the elect that would require the belief He doesn't then know everything about the non-elect. Which would contradict your assertion God knows everything.
And now you're simply asserting "God foreknew EVERYTHING" which means the elect are not those "God foreknew" as you previously asserted, because God forknowing everything means He forknew the non-elect too. Meaning it's not a qualifying factor of the "elect".
So, who are the elect Robert?
"It seems obvious that you think I am missing something... you keep rejecting my answer and trying to get me to say something different."
I've already explained that, including just now, above.
"Now please answer what it is that you think He does NOT foreknow?"
I never made any such assertion. We are attempting to sort out what you're asserting, because right now it's a convoluted, muddled, mess. When we're done sorting that out, perhaps I'll consider giving you a turn ;)
Right now we're still waiting for you to explain the difference between the elect and the non-elect.
John 1516 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, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.
Mod
My response: Sorry, but I cannot make it any more clear... GOD KNOWS EVERYTHING.
I never said He does not know about the non-elect... YOU keep saying that... not me.
GOD KNOWS EVERYTHING... do you agree? Or not?
Mod
16 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, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give ..."
My response: AMEN! Now what does God say is the foundation of His choosing?
Robert wrote: "Sorry, but I cannot make it any more clear... GOD KNOWS EVERYTHING."I get that part.
However, when I asked you who the elect were you stated they are those "God foreknew", which would mean the non-elect would be those God did not "foreknow", which contradicts your assertion God knows everything.
So yeah, you need to get that sorted out.
"I never said He does not know about the non-elect... YOU keep saying that... not me."
I've given you multiple opportunities to explain, I've asked you repeatedly foreknew what regarding the elect? It's you who continues to simply insist He just "foreknew", so it is your own fault you've painted yourself into that corner.
So, since you now are stating God foreknew the elect and non-elect, who are the elect? What exactly and specifically differentiates the elect from the non-elect?
Mod
My response: I did NOT make any contradiction. I was referring to the Word of God. Here is who I believe the elect are...
1 Peter 1:2 - Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father ...
By the way, I insist that God KNOWS EVERYTHING! That IS the answer to your question. Why do you REJECT this fact?
Is it because you greatly desire that God made His election NOT based on His knowing everything?
Mod
John 3:18 - " 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."
The foundation of God's choosing is His purpose to appoint people. So you are saying that God made free choosing people, and there's nothing He can do In All His Power to get billions of souls to follow Him? He isn't mighty enough to convince them, not persuasive enough, doesn't know their hearts needs? He foresees some but ignores the rest? Doesn't try hard enough?
My God doesn't fail.
Are you now asserting Robert that everyone is “non-elect” until/ unless they respond positively to the Gospel and then at that point they become “elect”?
Mod
Robert wrote: "I have said what I meant... I quoted the Bible... And you question it?"I don't question the Bible at all Robert, yet another of your false accusations. You are not the Bible - something that should be quite obvious - and I'm asking you a question.
What exactly and specifically differentiates the elect from the non-elect?
Clearly it is a question you cannot answer.
I'm done dancing around the maypole with you Robert, it's quite obvious, even after given numerous opportunities to do so, you cannot come up with a coherent position on this topic.
Rod wrote: "The foundation of God's choosing is His purpose to appoint people. So you are saying that God made free choosing people, and there's nothing He can do In All His Power to get billions of souls to..."
At this point I don't think he has any clue what he is trying to say.
Mod
Clearly it is a question you cannot answer...."
My response: I HAVE ANSWERED MANY TIMES. You REJECT the answer... that is your problem. ALL the dancing is on your part.
Here again is the answer (for you to REJECT again)…
John 3:18 - " 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."
Mod
Yet I ask questions and they are NEVER answered. Here are a few questions for which I would like your answers. (Feel free to answer them one number at a time, they have accumulated throughout this thread.)
1 On what does God say that He basis His mercy decisions on?
2 Please quote the foundation upon which God SAYS that He makes His election.
3 Is the Gospel of Jesus Christ is powerful enough to bring the dead to life.
4 What does God clearly say is His foundation for choosing His elect?
5 Is the Gospel of Jesus Christ powerful enough to save the non-elect? Or is it too weak to save them?
6 Which is more powerful? The total depravity of man? or The Gospel of Jesus Christ ?
7 Why do you think the Gospel is too weak to bring the dead to life?
8 Rod, is God omniscient? Does He know everything?
9 Is the sacrifice of Jesus powerless to save the lost?
10 What do you think God does not know?
11 Do you disagree that God knows everything?
12 Alexandra, do you agree with Rod, that God does NOT know everything ?
13 Rod, do you claim superiority over Greek scholars?
14 Do you believe God did NOT protect His word?
15 Rod, on what basis should anyone believe YOUR definition over that of scholars?
16 Is it because you greatly desire that God made His election NOT based on His knowing everything?
Robert wrote: "I HAVE ANSWERED MANY TIMES."No Robert, you have not. You have made self-refuting and contradictory statements, and I've pointed out how you've contradicted yourself, and given you every opportunity to come up with an explanation and answer that's not directly opposed to something you've already said.
I'm done waiting for you to do so.
"Here again is the answer (for you to REJECT again)…
John 3:18 - " 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."
I don't reject that Robert, and never have. But we all know that false accusations are one of your favorites in your bag of tricks, and that you're a bald-face liar. I've presented similar Scripture myself, and you poo poo'd the importance of belief.
However, you still have not, and clearly cannot answer my question.
I'm in a good mood, so I'll help you out.
You have asserted previously that the elect are those that God "foreknew" would respond to the Gospel message positively.
However although I've given you multiple opportunities to do so you're now insisting the elect are simply those God "foreknew".
I think it's likely that your quibbling is due to the fact that you're now beginning to realize the problem inherent in that position when it comes to your assertion that the non-elect can be saved. But doing so creates another problem for you.
If the elect are simply those God "foreknew", that would mean, by definition, the non-elect are those that God did not foreknow. And that is in direct opposition to your assertion that God knows everything.
Two things that are mutually exclusive cannot both be true. Either the elect are defined as those God forknew or He knows everything.
If God foreknew the non-elect, then God foreknowing the elect isn't what makes them elect, as foreknowing applies to both.
If God did not foreknow the non-elect, but only the elect, and this is what defines the elect, then God doesn't know everything.
If the elect are those that respond positively to the Gospel, that would mean the non-elect are those that will not respond positively to the Gospel. And that is in direct contradiction to your complaint that others think the non-elect cannot be saved.
So, if the non-elect can be saved, according to you, then salvation, positive response to the Gospel message, isn't a determining factor in who is, and who is not, the elect.
If the elect are those who respond positively to the Gospel message, then that requires that the non-elect are those that will not, and therefore the non-elect will not be saved.
In short: If God knows everything, then "foreknowing" isn't a determining factor for who is, who is not, the elect.
You could instead assert, as you previously have, that God foreknowing who would response positively to the Gospel message is what determines who is the elect, but doing so would contradict your notion that the non-elect can be saved.
If the non-elect can be saved, then salvation isn't a determining factor in who is, and who is not, the elect.
And so, I've asked you, multiple times, what exactly and specifically differentiates the elect from the non-elect?
A question you cannot answer, or more likely don't want to because you are beginning to see there's something that doesn't quite fit in what you are asserting.
I don't care what you believe frankly, but at least find something that isn't so obviously a contradictory mess.
Mod
Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath 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. ref: Westminster Confession of Faith IX:3
Man has limited choice in the natural realm, but God makes all the choices in the Spiritual.
John wrote: " Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath 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 s..."Robert has agreed man can do nothing, but denies God does it all.
So, according to Robert, salvation is 0% man, less than 100% God, and I never got an answer about the missing piece.
Mod
Try #6 - answer that question... I would like to know your thoughts.
Robert wrote: "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz."I have already addressed the issue of your "questions", more than once. It has become abundantly obvious that you either:
1. Have serious reading comprehension issues.
2. Have a condition which seriously impairs your memory.
3. You're not a native English speaker, and aren't proficient enough in English to understand and grasp what has already been said.
4. Don’t bother to actually read what others say.
And/or,
5. You're suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder and absolutely cannot tolerate it when others don't fall for your tricks, attempts to manipulate and control them, and the conversation. Likely most especially when those people are women.
Mod
Please let me know what post number contains your answer.
For now question #6 will be a good one for you to answer...
Mod
Robert wrote: "Truth I challenge anyone to find any of your answer to any of my 16+ questions.Please let me know what post number contains your answer.
For now question #6 will be a good one for you to answer..."
#6 The gospel of Jesus Christ is the power of God unto salvation. This is the main process used to choose His elect thru preaching. There are exceptions (see Acts 9). I don't see how your question #6 has any relevance. The total deprivation of Spiritual power in humans is the reason the election of God is necessary.
Robert wrote: "Truth I challenge anyone to find any of your answer to any of my 16+ questions.Please let me know what post number contains your answer.
For now question #6 will be a good one for you to answer..."
Thank you for proving my point :D
Mod
Hey, this is fun.Sorry, I've been busy doing Real ministry with Atheists and Muslims. This place just depresses me in its hopeless despair.
But I feel important enough for Robert to include me in some of his shortsighted attacks (I mean questions).
Foreknowing doesn't solve the problem of Roberts hatred for the theological scholarship of Calvin. It just moves the bar slightly to the liberal left. Same problem still. As Alexandra points out.Am I smarter than the theological giant John Calvin? Mostly no, but I live in a different time and have wider resources.
Is Robert smarter than all the Bible experts who reside in the Vatican? He thinks so. Do you see the problem Robert???
Mod
My response: Please QUOTE ME ever saying that I hate Calvin and his scholarship.
What I do hate is when people force the Word of God to say things that is does NOT say... to fit Calvin's doctrines.
Mod
My response: Do you see the problem Rod? There are just as many theological giants who disagree with Calvin as there are who agree.
So lets just stick with what the Bible DOES say and stop forcing the Bible to say what YOU WANT it to say (and doesn't say).
Mod
6 Which is more powerful? The total depravity of man? or The Gospel of Jesus Christ ?
Rod wrote: "Foreknowing doesn't solve the problem of Roberts hatred for the theological scholarship of Calvin. It just moves the bar slightly to the liberal left. Same problem still. As Alexandra points out."Actually, that's not what I pointed out.
What I did point out is that the assertion that those God foreknew who would respond positively to the Gospel are the Elect is a common inference - not arguing it's right or wrong, however it is one many sincere and genuine Christians hold - but pointed out that then claiming the non-Elect can be saved is contradictory to that position, and both things cannot be true.
I further pointed out the problems with his backpeddling that the Elect are simply those God "forknew" (in general), with his insistence that God knows everything.
Bottom line - I demonstrated how his position is contradictory and self-refuting, in and of itself, regardless of theological position.
Rod wrote: "But I feel important enough for Robert to include me in some of his shortsighted attacks (I mean questions). "Those are both attacks, and intentional deflection tactics ;) He wants to divert away from the problems with his position.
Mod
Those are both attacks, and intentional deflection tactics ;) He wants to..."
My response: Nope! Not deflecting anything. I am trying to stay focused on the 16 (or more) questions that I have asked but have been AVOIDED... lets focus...
Back to question #6
6 Which is more powerful? The total depravity of man? or The Gospel of Jesus Christ ?
Robert wrote: "Back to question #66 Which is more powerful? The total depravity of man? or The Gospel of Jesus Christ ?
"
Robert, see post 130 for answer to question #6
Robert wrote: "Nope! Not deflecting anything. "Yup, you are.
"I am trying to stay focused on the 16 (or more) questions that I have asked..."
Oh you sure are! Those "16 (or more) questions" that are your deflection and diversion tactic away from what we were discussing, as you cannot address either the questions I've raised, nor the problems in your position I've pointed out. You're desperately trying to steer the discussion away from those issues, and on to something you feel serves your agenda.
Those 16 "questions" are, as I've stated, both attacks, and intentional deflection tactics.
Believe me, I am quite focused, which is why you can't get me off track, much to your obvious dismay.
I've already addressed the issue of your "questions" more than once, as I've already pointed out. I'm not going to waste my time doing so again.
And when I did point that out, you demonstrated (yet again) that either you:
1. Have serious reading comprehension issues.
2. Have a condition which seriously impairs your memory.
3. You're not a native English speaker, and aren't proficient enough in English to understand and grasp what has already been said.
4. Don’t bother to actually read what others say.
And/or,
5. You're suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder and absolutely cannot tolerate it when others don't fall for your tricks, attempts to manipulate and control them, and the conversation. Likely most especially when those people are women.
Because you either:
1. Pretend to think that "already addressed the issue of your questions" means the same thing as claiming I answered your questions.
Or
2. You don't grasp the English language well enough to understand the meaning of the phrase.
Or
3. You didn't bother to actually read my posts.
Or
4. Your reading comprehension is so poor you don't understand what you read.
Or
5. You have serious memory issues and can't remember what's been said.
You further prove it by completely ignoring John's responses to you. Really sticks in your craw that you can't get a woman to be cowered into submission, doesn't it?
I'm not playing games with you Robert. You're clearly not going to address the actual topic at hand, which is dealing with your assertions, so you'll get no further attention from me.
Mod
My response: LOL!!!! I started the thread with a couple of questions, which you have not answered. I have asked 16 (or more) unanswered questions...
YOU are the ONE not addressing the actual topic (and since I started this thread... I know what the actual topic is)…
______________
Back to question #6
6 Which is more powerful? The total depravity of man? or The Gospel of Jesus Christ ?
Mod
6 Which is more powerful? The total depravity of man? or The Gospel of Jesus Christ ?
"Robert, see post 130 for answer to question #6"
My response: Thanks John for at least trying to answer the question.
I looked at #130 and I don't understand your answer.
Can the total depravity of man overpower the Gospel of Jesus Christ and make salvation impossible... or can the Gospel of Jesus Christ overpower the total depravity of man and make salvation possible?
Mod
My response: NOT TRUE. Please tell me which post number it is that you addressed my question #6.
This should be EASY if you are telling the truth. It is possible I missed your answer... which post number is it?
Mod
My response: WOW! What desperation! Playing the gender card for sympathy!
I challenge you to cite my post number in which I EVER said anything gender demeaning.
Of course you can't, and that is why you won't.
Robert wrote: "I started the thread with a couple of questions, which you have not answered. As I already pointed out twice, you started this thread with no questions, only statements you said were questions.
So, yet again we see, you either have serious problems with the English language, or can't remember what's been said, or you're simply a liar who plays games to serve his agenda.
I entered the conversation at a particular point, regarding particular things you were saying and claiming. Quite obviously those are things you desire to deflect away from, as I've already stated and explained.
"YOU are the ONE not addressing the actual topic (and since I started this thread... I know what the actual topic is)"
Your narcissism is showing again, Robert. You do not control the conversation. My participation on this thread was regarding the particular topic of your assertions and your claims, attempting to make coherent sense of them, and affording you the opportunity to explain and correct yourself in order to do so. And that is clearly the topic you desperately wish to avoid. Because obviously you cannot.
And now, you'll no doubt reply to yet again make false accusations, insult me, and insist I bend to your will.
Have at it, you've already gotten much more of my time and attention than you deserve, and I'm done wasting either on you.
Mod
My response: Apparently it is YOU who has difficulty with the English language.
Unbelievable that YOU actually think that YOU know how I started this thread.
Here is a direct quote from the onset of this thread...
"Who's sins did Jesus die for? Who benefits from His sacrifice?"
___________________
Step-by-step instructions (for those who may need them)
1) On your PC scroll up to the top of this page...
2) At the top of this page you will see the following...
Christian Readers discussion
Scripture Memorization >
3) Immediately to the right of the words "Scripture Memorization" you will see the following...
Who's sins did Jesus die for?
Who benefits from His sacrifice?
Mod
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/group...
Here is how this thread (that I started) is listed...
Who's sins did Jesus die for? Who benefits from His sacrifice?
But of course... according to those who consider themselves vastly superior... I am the narcissist????
Mod
My response: I suspect that she won't even have the decency to apologize for repeatedly and falsely claiming that I started this thread with NO questions...
...all the while anyone who scrolls to the top will clearly see that my initiation of this thread was quote:
"Who's sins did Jesus die for? Who benefits from His sacrifice?"
I'm glad you believe that. Since you do you should be able to actually answer my question, you say the elect are those God foreknew, foreknew what?
"I apologize for yelling"
It's about time. You should do that more often, or even better, try not to do it so often.
"God knows everything... elect, non-elect... end times... all of eternity past... all of eternity future... GOD KNOWS EVERYTHING."
And yet, we're still waiting for you to explain the difference between the elect God "foreknew" and the non-elect.