Freedom to Choose God (page 23)

Deputy Dog

ellderwho I have taken many water rescue classes as I know you have (in the navy). I have never herd of getting the victims permission before saving them, have you? In fact I have been taught just the opposite. When a person is drowning they are in such a panic that they will not (or can not) listen to instructions or even think at all. I was taught to rescue them wither they want to be saved or not. Also, this whole idea of a person drowning, really doesn't work for me, because we are not drowning because of a mistake. We have been condemned or sentenced to death because of crimes against God! And what I need is a total pardon, for all crimes (sins) past, present and future. D Dog

Deputy Dog

Undisfellowshipped You said:

Paul's Gospel message was NEVER like this:
Jesus Christ died and rose again only for a select number of people that He predestined for salvation before He created anything, and God only desires those select people to be saved, and God only wants those select people to repent.

Really, maybe Paul didn't know Jesus said:

John 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you. 17 These things I command you, that ye love one another. 18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. 19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

I fight for the truth of the Scripture. I defend the true Gospel that the Apostle Paul preached.

I pray that someday you fight for and defend the whole Gospel and not just the parts of it you like.

How about defending Romans chapter 9?

D Dog

LittleToe

DDog:
By strange coincidence I was only reading John 15 yesterday, and I thought of this thread. I've also been doing some heavy re-reading of Romans, since Thursday.

Just a word of caution, though. All things in love, eh? Some of the comments on this thread have been decidedly derisory.
Difference of doctrine doesn't mean a different Christ...

Deputy Dog

LT Normally, I would agree with you. But do you think being cut off for preaching another "gospel" simply because I don't agree with his insertion of "all humans" into the text when ever he sees fit, is serious don't you think? He doesn't consider us his brother.

Difference of doctrine doesn't mean a different Christ...

Tell that to undis. If you read about halfway through page 9 of this thread, He seems to disagree with you. I asked him this question:

How does answering this question " Did Jesus Christ die for all humans, or did He die only for certain humans whom God predestined to save?" actually determine whether or not someone is teaching a false Gospel?

Here is his response:

Because the Bible says so: 1st Timothy 2:5-7: For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, [and] lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity. The Apostle Paul said that the Gospel that he was ordained to preach to the Gentiles was that Christ Jesus "gave Himself a ransom FOR ALL." The Apostle Paul also stated this very strong warning against preaching another "gospel": Galatians 1:8-9: But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

How do you like being accursed? It seems that in undisfellowshippeds mind 1st Timothy 2:6 can only be read his way. I have tried to explain to him that I believe this verse actully teaches my view. I believe the verse should be understood this way.

Who gave himself a ransom for all (who believe) , (the "who" are what is) to be testified in due time.

If we could slow down and deal with one verse at a time we could avoid things like this. D Dog

ellderwho

I agree DDog,

The drowning guy thing has to go. Its just a bad example.

Difference of doctrine doesn't mean a different Christ...

Really?

Undis..The Apostle Paul said that the Gospel that he was ordained to preach to the Gentiles was that Christ Jesus "gave Himself a ransom FOR ALL."

LT, what does the above atatement(red part) do with the entire human race since Adam?

I believe the Dee Dog hit it right on the head, Undis' Christ ransoms just makes mankind savable!

E.

LittleToe

DDog:Then surely it's up to you to be the bigger person, in that situation

The question is, do we still view him as a brother? I know I certainly do.

LittleToe

Ellderwho:
I'm not a Universalist, if that's what you're getting at.
I recently heard a sermon where the comment was made that no-one will get to their ultimate "eternity" but by the blood of Christ. Some by being washed in it, and others by trampling it underfoot.

I had a similar conversation (on treating each other with love) in "real life", recently, with one of my Calvinist brothers, who seemed quite happy to dismiss Arminians out of hand. He went kinda silent when I pointed out to him that although I believe their doctrine to be in error, it certainly causes them to work hard, perhaps far harder than us...

Let's not get our knickers in a twist about finer points of doctrine, huh?
I'm sure UnDF'ed is enjoying this conversation, too, and seems to be reassessing various things. It would be a shame for him to be put off that worthy objective by a few harsh comments and unnecessary sarcasm.

Do you honestly think UnDF'ed is trampling the blood of Christ underfoot?

Everything in charity...

DDog:
Incidentally, my comments about the Tripart man are to be understood in the context of the thread title. I wasn't trying to take the conversation down a rabbit hole.

ellderwho

LT, the problem with this thread has been identify what Undis will commit to actually believing.

pg.9 I agree that all humans (left by themselves, without God's intervention) would all die in their sins and go to Hell because they are born with a sinful corrupted nature.

So on this hand he contends that mans nature is no good whatsoever period.

pg.9 But I also believe that my God has the power and the will to enlighten a spiritually dead human with the truth of the Gospel and allow that person the freedom to choose to repent and believe or reject and be lost eternally

But on this hand he claims that mans nature will ultimately decide.

But dont we all know by now what mans nature is???????

If he says otherwise he has the HolySpirit rejecting itself. The end.

I will split hairs with the best of them. But when Im told something is in scripture, and it aint there, that person needs to be refuted.

Is he a brother in Christ? I suppose so.But I cant say for sure. I hope he is. Do we see Jesus in the same saving light? well that is to be determined.

E.

Edited to add;

I had a similar conversation (on treating each other with love) in "real life", recently, with one of my Calvinist brothers, who seemed quite happy to dismiss Arminians out of hand. He went kinda silent when I pointed out to him that although I believe their doctrine to be in error, it certainly causes them to work hard, perhaps far harder than us...

I like that.

LittleToe

EW:
I strongly suspect that UnDF'ed has been reassessing a number of things during the weeks that this thread has progressed (in fact I think he's intimated the same). It isn't an easy thing to do, and I can't speak for the kind of fellowship that he may be receiving, as to whether or not he's being reinforced in either direction.

One thing I feel certain of, though, is that the Spirit ultimately wins...

(Besides, as DDog rightly pointed out, there have been enough texts slung around here to sink the whole of Dort, far less our meager minds )

Deputy Dog

LT

I mean no ill will to undis, Im just trying to argue his own point back at him. I don't believe he has thought it through.

D Dog

Freedom to Choose God

Share this