Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Calvinism or Arminianism? How do you answer?


PastorMatt
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Members
9 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

That is an interesting response.  I provide a direct quote of God's Holy Word, and you question the truthfulness of the Biblical quote by distorting its actual teaching.  So, to answer your question --

No sir, I think what God's Word actually says is the truth, regardless of what you say about it.  What God's Word actually says in the second half of Romans 5:18 is - "Even so by the righteousness of one THE FREE GIFT came upon all men UNTO justification of life."  It does not matter to me how much you try to deny it, God's Word says it; and that means it IS the truth.

Seems that I have already explained this once, but I will do it again.  The second half of Romans 5:18 does NOT say, "Even so by the righteousness of one justification of life came upon all men."  IF God's Word said that, then it would mean that all men are indeed justified and regenerated.  However, again I emphasize that God's Word does NOT say such.  Rather, God's Word in the second half of Romans 5:18 says, "Even so by the righteousness of one THE FREE GIFT came upon all men UNTO justification of life."  It is NOT that justification itself came upon all men, but that the FREE GIFT which is unto justification came upon all men.  The Lord our God does NOT simply justify and regenerate all men, but He has and does offer unto all men the FREE GIFT which is unto justification and regeneration.  However, as I stated already above, a gift by its very nature must be received (as per Romans 5:17) in order to be applied.  The free gift as a gift is upon (offered unto) all men, but the justification and regeneration that it provides is applied only unto those who receive it.

I do not believe in universal justification and regeneration, just as you do not believe in universal justification and regeneration.  However, the difference between us is that I do believe that the righteousness of Christ's sacrifice on the cross provided for the free gift unto justification and regeneration for the sake of "all men," whereas I expect that as a Calvinist you believe that the righteousness of Christ's sacrifice on the cross provided for the free gift unto justification and regeneration only for the sake of the predestinated elect.

Sorry Pastor Scott,

I do not deny Gods word as written.

I deny your attempted addition to it.

The text describes two representatives.

A person is either dead in sin, or alive In Christ.

There is not mention of an offer to all men anywhere here as you add to the text.

It is not potential but actual.

Your allusion to verse 17 does not help your case.

Any recieving of this grace is by the will of God, not the will of man as Jesus taught in Jn.1:13.

I am glad we agree that it indeed is not universal.

You are correct that I believe the passage describes those elected by God are the objects of this great mercy and Grace.

That is not a bad thing, but rather consistent with the teaching of Romans.

I am content to own and defend the confessional view, which is the biblical view.

I do not feel the need to qualify it by making statements that I am a biblicist, or I just use my bible.

Everyone who posts can say such things, but the truth shines through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
40 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

Sorry Pastor Scott,

I do not deny Gods word as written. (emphasis added by Pastor Scott Markle)

Actually, Mr. Iconoclast, in a previous posting you did exactly that --

14 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

Hello Pastor Scott,

You go astray in that the section is not saying the "free gift" Has been made available unto all men, or has come upon all men at all. (emphasis added by Pastor Scott Markle)

Whereas God's Word AS WRITTEN says in the second half of Romans 5:18, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."  Such is precisely what is written in God's Word.  Such is precisely what you denied in your earlier posting.  

Here is what is written:

1.  The free gift came by the righteousness of Christ.
2.  The free gift came upon all men.
3.  The free gift is unto justification of life.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

Election is a biblical term, free will is not. It is not a theory it is biblical teaching. Election is a great blessing to the Church.Paul was so excited to speak of it.\

The second longest sentence in the Nt. is Eph1:3-14. it is one sentence.

Paul praises God for it. Why would you suggest it is a theory?

All of you who oppose these biblical teachings try and suggest such ideas.

Clearly All who are found In Christ on the last day are not All who remain in Adam. How do you not see this?

God is always true. He cannot lie. So it is your interpretation that is flawed.

Here is the ALL that is most important;

37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

God is going to save the All the Father has given to the Son. Jesus taught that, not Calvin or Augustine.

They taught it because Jesus did.

The Bible shows time and time again that people are told to "choose" whom they would serve, given choices to "follow me" (Jesus gave this offer to many, allowing them to use their free will), and to make decisions, just as God gave Adam in the Garden. Man fell. It didn't negate his free will and power of choice. God didn't magically take it away. God, knowing who would and wouldn't accept him did GIVE to Christ those whom would accept him. Yet, the choice is still theirs. We won't agree on terminology, and I won't go against what a majority of the Bible has taught. I won't cherry pick verses to try and back up a theory as those who follow Calvin do. I will, however put John 3:16," For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."  Christ died to offer the WHOLE WORLD salvation if they will accept his free gift. Believing is an act of the will...FREE WiLL. Remember, this wasn't taken away by the fall of Adam, no matter how much those who believe the Calvinic doctrines want us to accept their views and terminology. Cain had free will to let Abel live, or to kill him...he killed him. God gave the Israelites the CHOICE to either follow him or lose their lives...many of them tempted/rebelled against God, and their lives were taken in several different situations. Free will was not negated in the Garden, and it doesn't affect God's sovereignty in any way.

Edited by BrotherTony
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Mr. Iconoclast,

57 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

The text describes two representatives.

Not precisely.  A representative is one who makes decisions on behalf of others.  This is not what Romans 5:12-21 describes.  Rather, Romans 5:12-21 describes two heads whose actions have spiritually affected others.  Throughout the context the others whom their actions have spiritually affected are designated and defined by the terms "all men" in verse 12 and 18 and "many" in verses 15 and 19.

1 hour ago, Iconoclast said:

A person is either dead in sin, or alive In Christ.

This is Biblically correct according to Romans 6:1-11; Ephesians 2:1-9; etc.  However, do you recognize that throughout the context of Romans 5:12-21 we do not encounter the direct reference to being "in" Adam or "in" Christ at all?  Rather, throughout the context of Romans 5:12-21 the operative emphasis is on the prepositions "by" and "through," that is -- "by" and "through" Adam or "by" and "through" Christ.

1 hour ago, Iconoclast said:

There is not mention of an offer to all men anywhere here as you add to the text.

Yet there is a very specific statement in the second half of Romans 5:18, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."  So, what does this very specific statement mean?  What does it mean that the free gift came upon all men?  Based upon the phrasing itself, there can only be so many possibilities:

1.  One possibility is that all men receive "justification of life."  Yet we know that this possibility of meaning contradicts the rest of Scripture and thus cannot be the correct meaning.

2.  One possibility is that only all believers receive "justification of life."  Now, concerning the application of justification and regeneration only to believers, this possibility would stand consistent with the rest of Scripture.  However, this possibility also requires us to change the phrase that God the Holy Spirit specifically and direction inspired from "all men" to only "all believers."  Yet God the Holy Spirit did NOT inspire the statement, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all believers unto justification of life."  Rather, God the Holy Spirit DID specifically inspire the statement, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon ALL MEN unto justification of life."  Attempting to apply this Biblical statement unto any group less than "ALL MEN" is a direct denial of that which God the Holy Spirit Himself specifically and directly inspired.  Therefore, this possibility also cannot be the correct meaning.  (Now thus far, this is the position that you have taken, which has required you to deny and/or alter the "all men" designation that God the Holy Spirit Himself has inspired.)

3.  One possibility is that, not justification of life itself, but the free gift that is unto justification of life has come upon all men as an open offer unto them.  Now, from my understanding this possibility handles the grammar of the statement accurately, without denying or changing any part thereof. 

Note: Grammatically in the Greek the subject and verb for each of the two statements in Romans 5:18 are not specifically present, which is why the King James translation includes them with italics.  Contextually and grammatically the subject and verb for each of the two statements in Romans 5:18 are supplied by the statements of Romans 5:16, wherein the grammatical parallels (which I have highlighted by color coordination) are as follows:

Romans 5:16 - "For the judgment was by one to condemnation."
Romans 5:18 - "Therefore as
by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation."
(In Romans 5:18 the phrase "judgment came" is in italics in the King James translation because it is not directly in the Greek of the verse, but is contextually and grammatically supplied by the earlier statement of Romans 5:16.  Furthermore, the one additional truth that Romans 5:18 supplies is the phrase "upon all men.")

Romans 5:16 - "But the free gift is of many offences unto justification."
Romans 5:18 - "Even so
by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."
(In Romans 5:18 the phrase "the free gift came" is in italics in the King James translation because it is not directly in the Greek of the verse, but is contextually and grammatically supplied by the earlier statement of Romans 5:16.  Furthermore, Romans 5:18 provides three additional thoughts to that of Romans 5:16.  First, whereas Romans 5:16 indicates that the free gift unto justification is "[out] of many offences," Romans 5:18 indicates it is "by the righteousness of one [Christ]."  Second, Romans 5:18 adds the truth that this free gift is "upon all men."  Third, Romans 5:18 indicates that the justification in this free gift is a justification "of life.")

Thus grammatically Romans 5:18 teaches the following:

1.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists (being supplied from Romans 5:16, the verb "came" indicates state of being) by the righteousness of Christ.

2.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists (the verb "came" indicates state of being) "unto" (for the purpose of) "justification of life."

3.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists "upon all men" (herein the preposition "upon" translates the Greek preposition "eis," which means "into, unto, toward, for the sake of.")

Even so, I myself choose to follow option #3 above, because it is the one option which does not contradict the rest of Scripture and which stands true to the specific grammar of Romans 5:18. 

(However, option #3 above is certainly contrary to the doctrinal system of Calvinism, because it would mean that the Lord our God, by the righteous sacrifice of Christ, made His gracious gift of justification to exist toward/upon/for the sake of "ALL MEN;" whereas the doctrinal system of Calvinism rejects this teaching.  Thus the Calvinist will seek in some way to change the meaning of "all men" in the second half of Romans 5:18.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

You think all men who live are currently justified?

Just because a gift

is offered doesn't mean it is accepted. That involves free will...sorry...no cigar!

Edited by BrotherTony
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

Where does scripture say it is offered and not given?

Offered or given, a gift can be rejected. The offer was extended to the rich young ruler and rejected. That's just one of many examples. Semantics. I don't play that game.

Edited by BrotherTony
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Heartstrings
1 hour ago, Iconoclast said:

Where does scripture say it is offered and not given?

Here, the Gospel was offered but rejected.....or "put off for a convenient season". However, during the encounter, the man was so shook up, he "trembled".

 

Acts 24

24 And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.

25 And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.

 

Sounds an awful lot like the Holy Ghost(here called the "Comforter") was dealing with Felix heart......

 

John 16: 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
8 hours ago, BrotherTony said:
Quote

The Bible shows time and time again that people are told to "choose" whom they would serve, given choices to "follow me"

Yes, it does use such terms. Men have a will and can make choices. men have self will that is bound by sin

Free will is not in the bible however. It is not there because it does not exist.

Quote

(Jesus gave this offer to many, allowing them to use their free will) and to make decisions, just as God gave Adam in the Garden. Man fell. It didn't negate his free will and power of choice.

The bible does not say this, you do. You take a carnal philosophy and try and insert into  into the bible,

 

Quote

and to make decisions, just as God gave Adam in the Garden. Man fell. It didn't negate his free will and power of choice. God didn't magically take it away.

Again you are spinning a fantasy. The bible does not say or teach any such thing.😏

 

Quote

God, knowing who would and wouldn't accept him did GIVE to Christ those whom would accept him

More Fiction. God is not a spectator waiting to see what man will do then acting accordingly..

Psalm 14:1-3 teaches that God already knows that no one would seek God, no, not one.

But because of your man centered theology, and idol of free will, you have to try and superimpose it on scripture

 

Quote

Yet, the choice is still theirs.

No. The only choice made was God's election of a multitude of sinners to save In Christ

 

Quote

We won't agree on terminology, and I won't go against what a majority of the Bible has taught. I won't cherry pick verses to try and back up a theory as those who follow Calvin do.

Most Calvinists do not read Calvin, they read scripture, they read Jesus and the Apostles. very few read Calvin, but you need that as a crutch to avoid the actual discussion,

 

Quote

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

Quote

Calvinists have Jn. 3:15-18in their bible as well. They believe it with the proper understanding of it however.

 

 

Quote

Christ died to offer the WHOLE WORLD salvation if they will accept his free gift.

Not what the bible actually teaches, we are made accepted in the beloved, it is the action of God.

Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

 

Quote

Believing is an act of the will...FREE WiLL. Remember, this wasn't taken away by the fall of Adam, no matter how much those who believe the Calvinic doctrines want us to accept their views and terminology.

Not according to jn1:

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

 

Quote

Cain had free will to let Abel live, or to kill him...he killed him. God gave the Israelites the CHOICE to either follow him or lose their lives...many of them tempted/rebelled against God, and their lives were taken in several different situations. Free will was not negated in the Garden, and it doesn't affect God's sovereignty in any way.

It was never there. It will not be in heaven, this is carnal philosophy.

I believe you are sincere Tony, but many of your beliefs come from philosophy and emotion rather than scripture.

Thanks for your response.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
7 hours ago, Guest Heartstrings said:

Here, the Gospel was offered but rejected.....or "put off for a convenient season". However, during the encounter, the man was so shook up, he "trembled".

 

Acts 24

24 And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.

25 And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.

 

Sounds an awful lot like the Holy Ghost(here called the "Comforter") was dealing with Felix heart......

 

John 16: 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

Hello Gh, Sometimes we present the truth to seal the doom of the reprobate;

14 Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place.

15 For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:

16 To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?

17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

9 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Mr. Iconoclast,

Not precisely.  A representative is one who makes decisions on behalf of others.  This is not what Romans 5:12-21 describes.  Rather, Romans 5:12-21 describes two heads whose actions have spiritually affected others.  Throughout the context the others whom their actions have spiritually affected are designated and defined by the terms "all men" in verse 12 and 18 and "many" in verses 15 and 19.

This is Biblically correct according to Romans 6:1-11; Ephesians 2:1-9; etc.  However, do you recognize that throughout the context of Romans 5:12-21 we do not encounter the direct reference to being "in" Adam or "in" Christ at all?  Rather, throughout the context of Romans 5:12-21 the operative emphasis is on the prepositions "by" and "through," that is -- "by" and "through" Adam or "by" and "through" Christ.

Yet there is a very specific statement in the second half of Romans 5:18, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."  So, what does this very specific statement mean?  What does it mean that the free gift came upon all men?  Based upon the phrasing itself, there can only be so many possibilities:

1.  One possibility is that all men receive "justification of life."  Yet we know that this possibility of meaning contradicts the rest of Scripture and thus cannot be the correct meaning.

2.  One possibility is that only all believers receive "justification of life."  Now, concerning the application of justification and regeneration only to believers, this possibility would stand consistent with the rest of Scripture.  However, this possibility also requires us to change the phrase that God the Holy Spirit specifically and direction inspired from "all men" to only "all believers."  Yet God the Holy Spirit did NOT inspire the statement, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all believers unto justification of life."  Rather, God the Holy Spirit DID specifically inspire the statement, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon ALL MEN unto justification of life."  Attempting to apply this Biblical statement unto any group less than "ALL MEN" is a direct denial of that which God the Holy Spirit Himself specifically and directly inspired.  Therefore, this possibility also cannot be the correct meaning.  (Now thus far, this is the position that you have taken, which has required you to deny and/or alter the "all men" designation that God the Holy Spirit Himself has inspired.)

3.  One possibility is that, not justification of life itself, but the free gift that is unto justification of life has come upon all men as an open offer unto them.  Now, from my understanding this possibility handles the grammar of the statement accurately, without denying or changing any part thereof. 

Note: Grammatically in the Greek the subject and verb for each of the two statements in Romans 5:18 are not specifically present, which is why the King James translation includes them with italics.  Contextually and grammatically the subject and verb for each of the two statements in Romans 5:18 are supplied by the statements of Romans 5:16, wherein the grammatical parallels (which I have highlighted by color coordination) are as follows:

Romans 5:16 - "For the judgment was by one to condemnation."
Romans 5:18 - "Therefore as
by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation."
(In Romans 5:18 the phrase "judgment came" is in italics in the King James translation because it is not directly in the Greek of the verse, but is contextually and grammatically supplied by the earlier statement of Romans 5:16.  Furthermore, the one additional truth that Romans 5:18 supplies is the phrase "upon all men.")

Romans 5:16 - "But the free gift is of many offences unto justification."
Romans 5:18 - "Even so
by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."
(In Romans 5:18 the phrase "the free gift came" is in italics in the King James translation because it is not directly in the Greek of the verse, but is contextually and grammatically supplied by the earlier statement of Romans 5:16.  Furthermore, Romans 5:18 provides three additional thoughts to that of Romans 5:16.  First, whereas Romans 5:16 indicates that the free gift unto justification is "[out] of many offences," Romans 5:18 indicates it is "by the righteousness of one [Christ]."  Second, Romans 5:18 adds the truth that this free gift is "upon all men."  Third, Romans 5:18 indicates that the justification in this free gift is a justification "of life.")

Thus grammatically Romans 5:18 teaches the following:

1.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists (being supplied from Romans 5:16, the verb "came" indicates state of being) by the righteousness of Christ.

2.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists (the verb "came" indicates state of being) "unto" (for the purpose of) "justification of life."

3.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists "upon all men" (herein the preposition "upon" translates the Greek preposition "eis," which means "into, unto, toward, for the sake of.")

Even so, I myself choose to follow option #3 above, because it is the one option which does not contradict the rest of Scripture and which stands true to the specific grammar of Romans 5:18. 

(However, option #3 above is certainly contrary to the doctrinal system of Calvinism, because it would mean that the Lord our God, by the righteous sacrifice of Christ, made His gracious gift of justification to exist toward/upon/for the sake of "ALL MEN;" whereas the doctrinal system of Calvinism rejects this teaching.  Thus the Calvinist will seek in some way to change the meaning of "all men" in the second half of Romans 5:18.)

 

Thanks for taking time to clarify your position, and for being willing to search the scriptures.This is a large part of what we are to be about . We need to have as much truth as we can to present truth to those outside the Kingdom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
42 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

Hello Gh, Sometimes we present the truth to seal the doom of the reprobate;

14 Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place.

15 For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:

16 To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?

17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

Thanks for taking time to clarify your position, and for being willing to search the scriptures.This is a large part of what we are to be about . We need to have as much truth as we can to present truth to those outside the Kingdom.

http://www.godrules.net/library/vincent/vincentrom5.htm

 

17. Reigned. The emphatic point of the comparison. The effect of the second Adam cannot fall behind that of the first. If death reigned, there must be a reign of life.

They which receive (oi lambanontev). Not believingly accept, but simply the recipients.

Abundance of grace. Note the articles, the abundance of the grace.

18. The offense of one (enov paraptwmatov). Rev., corrects, one trespass.

The righteousness of one (enov dikaiwmatov). See on ver 16. Rev., correctly, one act of righteousness.

19. Disobedience (parakohv). Only here, 2 Cor. x. 6; Hebrews ix. 2. The kindred verb paralouw to neglect, Rev., refuse, occurs Matthew xviii. 17. From para aside, amiss, and ajkouw to hear, sometimes with the accompanying sense of heeding, and so nearly = obey. Parakoh is therefore, primarily, a failing to hear or hearing amiss. Bengel remarks that the word very appositely points out the first step in Adam's fall - carelessness, as the beginning of a city's capture is the remissness of the guards.

Were made (katestaqhsan). See on Jas. iii. 6. Used elsewhere by Paul only at Tit. i. 5, in the sense of to appoint to office or position. This is its most frequent use in the New Testament. See Matt. xxiv. 25; Acts vi. 3; vii. 10; Heb. v. 1, etc. The primary meaning being to set down, it is used in classical Greek of bringing to a place, as a ship to the land, or a man to a place or person; hence to bring before a magistrate (Acts xvii. 15). From this comes the meaning to set down as, i.e., to declare or show to be; or to constitute, make to be. So 2 Pet. i. 8; Jas. iv. 4; iii. 6. The exact meaning in this passage is disputed. The following are the principal explanations:

1. Set down in a declarative sense; declared to be.

2. Placed in the category of sinners because of a vital connection with the first tranegressor.

3. Became sinners; were made. This last harmonizes with sinned in ver. 12.

The disobedience of Adam is thus declared to have been the occasion of the death of all, because it is the occasion of their sin; but the precise nature of this relation is not explained. 36 Obedience (upakohv). Note the play on the words, parakoe, hypokoe, disobedience, obedience. Upakoh obedience, is also derived from ajkouw to hear (see on disobedience) and uJpo beneath, the idea being submission to what one hears.

20. The law entered (pareishlqen) Rev., literally, came in beside, giving the force of para beside. Very significant. Now that the parallel between Adam and Christ is closed, the question arises as to the position and office of the law. How did it stand related to Adam and Christ? Paul replies that it came in alongside of the sin. "It was taken up into the divine plan or arrangement, and made an occasion for the abounding of grace in the opening of the new way to justification and life" (Dwight).

Might abound (pleonash). Not primarily of the greater consciousness and acknowledgment of sin, but of the increase of actual transgression. The other thought, however, may be included. See ch. vii. 7, 8, 9, 11.

Did much more abound (upereperisseusen). Lit., abounded over and above. Only here and 2 Cor. vii. 4. Compare uJperepleonase abounded exceedingly, 1 Tim. i. 14; uJperperisswv beyond measure, Mark vii. 37; uJperauxanei; groweth exceedingly, 2 Thess. i. 3.

21. Unto death (en tw qanatw). Wrong. In death, as Rev. As the sphere or dominion of death's tyranny. Compare ver. 14, "death reigned." Some, however, explain the preposition as instrumental, by death. How much is lost by the inaccurate rendering of the prepositions. Ellicott remarks that there are few points more characteristic of the apostle's style than his varied but accurate use of prepositions, especially of two or more in the same or in immediately contiguous clauses. See Rom. iii. 22; Ephesians iv. 6; Col. i. 16.

Through Jesus Christ our Lord. "And now - so this last word seems to say - Adam has passed away; Christ alone remains" (Godet).

1 minute ago, Iconoclast said:

http://www.godrules.net/library/vincent/vincentrom5.htm

 

17. Reigned. The emphatic point of the comparison. The effect of the second Adam cannot fall behind that of the first. If death reigned, there must be a reign of life.

They which receive (oi lambanontev). Not believingly accept, but simply the recipients.

Abundance of grace. Note the articles, the abundance of the grace.

18. The offense of one (enov paraptwmatov). Rev., corrects, one trespass.

The righteousness of one (enov dikaiwmatov). See on ver 16. Rev., correctly, one act of righteousness.

19. Disobedience (parakohv). Only here, 2 Cor. x. 6; Hebrews ix. 2. The kindred verb paralouw to neglect, Rev., refuse, occurs Matthew xviii. 17. From para aside, amiss, and ajkouw to hear, sometimes with the accompanying sense of heeding, and so nearly = obey. Parakoh is therefore, primarily, a failing to hear or hearing amiss. Bengel remarks that the word very appositely points out the first step in Adam's fall - carelessness, as the beginning of a city's capture is the remissness of the guards.

Were made (katestaqhsan). See on Jas. iii. 6. Used elsewhere by Paul only at Tit. i. 5, in the sense of to appoint to office or position. This is its most frequent use in the New Testament. See Matt. xxiv. 25; Acts vi. 3; vii. 10; Heb. v. 1, etc. The primary meaning being to set down, it is used in classical Greek of bringing to a place, as a ship to the land, or a man to a place or person; hence to bring before a magistrate (Acts xvii. 15). From this comes the meaning to set down as, i.e., to declare or show to be; or to constitute, make to be. So 2 Pet. i. 8; Jas. iv. 4; iii. 6. The exact meaning in this passage is disputed. The following are the principal explanations:

1. Set down in a declarative sense; declared to be.

2. Placed in the category of sinners because of a vital connection with the first tranegressor.

3. Became sinners; were made. This last harmonizes with sinned in ver. 12.

The disobedience of Adam is thus declared to have been the occasion of the death of all, because it is the occasion of their sin; but the precise nature of this relation is not explained. 36 Obedience (upakohv). Note the play on the words, parakoe, hypokoe, disobedience, obedience. Upakoh obedience, is also derived from ajkouw to hear (see on disobedience) and uJpo beneath, the idea being submission to what one hears.

20. The law entered (pareishlqen) Rev., literally, came in beside, giving the force of para beside. Very significant. Now that the parallel between Adam and Christ is closed, the question arises as to the position and office of the law. How did it stand related to Adam and Christ? Paul replies that it came in alongside of the sin. "It was taken up into the divine plan or arrangement, and made an occasion for the abounding of grace in the opening of the new way to justification and life" (Dwight).

Might abound (pleonash). Not primarily of the greater consciousness and acknowledgment of sin, but of the increase of actual transgression. The other thought, however, may be included. See ch. vii. 7, 8, 9, 11.

Did much more abound (upereperisseusen). Lit., abounded over and above. Only here and 2 Cor. vii. 4. Compare uJperepleonase abounded exceedingly, 1 Tim. i. 14; uJperperisswv beyond measure, Mark vii. 37; uJperauxanei; groweth exceedingly, 2 Thess. i. 3.

21. Unto death (en tw qanatw). Wrong. In death, as Rev. As the sphere or dominion of death's tyranny. Compare ver. 14, "death reigned." Some, however, explain the preposition as instrumental, by death. How much is lost by the inaccurate rendering of the prepositions. Ellicott remarks that there are few points more characteristic of the apostle's style than his varied but accurate use of prepositions, especially of two or more in the same or in immediately contiguous clauses. See Rom. iii. 22; Ephesians iv. 6; Col. i. 16.

Through Jesus Christ our Lord. "And now - so this last word seems to say - Adam has passed away; Christ alone remains" (Godet).

Wiersbe draws a practical application noting that "our justification is the result of a living union with Christ. And this union ought to result in a new kind of life, a righteous life of obedience to God. Our union with Adam made us sinners; our union with Christ enables us to “reign in life.” (Wiersbe, W: Bible Exposition Commentary. 1989. Victor)

Because of Adam’s disobedience, the many were appointed by God to be sinners. They were put down in the category of and constituted to be sinners. Because of Christ’s obedience, the many will be appointed to be righteous. Amazing grace that saved wretches such as we!

John MacArthur draws a practical conclusion from this passage commenting that "The person who genuinely belongs to Jesus Christ will reflect that same spirit of obedience, because he has Christ’s own life within him. When a person places his trust in Christ, he not only is declared righteous forensically but is actually made righteous, that is, given an inward righteousness that must and will bear fruit. As long as a believer is in the flesh, he will have the shortcomings and weaknesses of the flesh, and his righteousness will not be manifested perfectly. But if a person’s life is characterized by sin and shows no fruit of the Holy Spirit (see notes Galatians 5:22; 5:23), that person has no legitimate claim on Christ. The person who is made righteous by Christ will live righteously. (MacArthur, J: Romans 1-8. Chicago: Moody Press)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 5/16/2022 at 9:32 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Mr. Iconoclast,

Not precisely.  A representative is one who makes decisions on behalf of others.  This is not what Romans 5:12-21 describes.  Rather, Romans 5:12-21 describes two heads whose actions have spiritually affected others.  Throughout the context the others whom their actions have spiritually affected are designated and defined by the terms "all men" in verse 12 and 18 and "many" in verses 15 and 19.

This is Biblically correct according to Romans 6:1-11; Ephesians 2:1-9; etc.  However, do you recognize that throughout the context of Romans 5:12-21 we do not encounter the direct reference to being "in" Adam or "in" Christ at all?  Rather, throughout the context of Romans 5:12-21 the operative emphasis is on the prepositions "by" and "through," that is -- "by" and "through" Adam or "by" and "through" Christ.

Yet there is a very specific statement in the second half of Romans 5:18, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."  So, what does this very specific statement mean?  What does it mean that the free gift came upon all men?  Based upon the phrasing itself, there can only be so many possibilities:

1.  One possibility is that all men receive "justification of life."  Yet we know that this possibility of meaning contradicts the rest of Scripture and thus cannot be the correct meaning.

2.  One possibility is that only all believers receive "justification of life."  Now, concerning the application of justification and regeneration only to believers, this possibility would stand consistent with the rest of Scripture.  However, this possibility also requires us to change the phrase that God the Holy Spirit specifically and direction inspired from "all men" to only "all believers."  Yet God the Holy Spirit did NOT inspire the statement, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all believers unto justification of life."  Rather, God the Holy Spirit DID specifically inspire the statement, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon ALL MEN unto justification of life."  Attempting to apply this Biblical statement unto any group less than "ALL MEN" is a direct denial of that which God the Holy Spirit Himself specifically and directly inspired.  Therefore, this possibility also cannot be the correct meaning.  (Now thus far, this is the position that you have taken, which has required you to deny and/or alter the "all men" designation that God the Holy Spirit Himself has inspired.)

3.  One possibility is that, not justification of life itself, but the free gift that is unto justification of life has come upon all men as an open offer unto them.  Now, from my understanding this possibility handles the grammar of the statement accurately, without denying or changing any part thereof. 

Note: Grammatically in the Greek the subject and verb for each of the two statements in Romans 5:18 are not specifically present, which is why the King James translation includes them with italics.  Contextually and grammatically the subject and verb for each of the two statements in Romans 5:18 are supplied by the statements of Romans 5:16, wherein the grammatical parallels (which I have highlighted by color coordination) are as follows:

Romans 5:16 - "For the judgment was by one to condemnation."
Romans 5:18 - "Therefore as
by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation."
(In Romans 5:18 the phrase "judgment came" is in italics in the King James translation because it is not directly in the Greek of the verse, but is contextually and grammatically supplied by the earlier statement of Romans 5:16.  Furthermore, the one additional truth that Romans 5:18 supplies is the phrase "upon all men.")

Romans 5:16 - "But the free gift is of many offences unto justification."
Romans 5:18 - "Even so
by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."
(In Romans 5:18 the phrase "the free gift came" is in italics in the King James translation because it is not directly in the Greek of the verse, but is contextually and grammatically supplied by the earlier statement of Romans 5:16.  Furthermore, Romans 5:18 provides three additional thoughts to that of Romans 5:16.  First, whereas Romans 5:16 indicates that the free gift unto justification is "[out] of many offences," Romans 5:18 indicates it is "by the righteousness of one [Christ]."  Second, Romans 5:18 adds the truth that this free gift is "upon all men."  Third, Romans 5:18 indicates that the justification in this free gift is a justification "of life.")

Thus grammatically Romans 5:18 teaches the following:

1.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists (being supplied from Romans 5:16, the verb "came" indicates state of being) by the righteousness of Christ.

2.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists (the verb "came" indicates state of being) "unto" (for the purpose of) "justification of life."

3.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists "upon all men" (herein the preposition "upon" translates the Greek preposition "eis," which means "into, unto, toward, for the sake of.")

Even so, I myself choose to follow option #3 above, because it is the one option which does not contradict the rest of Scripture and which stands true to the specific grammar of Romans 5:18. 

(However, option #3 above is certainly contrary to the doctrinal system of Calvinism, because it would mean that the Lord our God, by the righteous sacrifice of Christ, made His gracious gift of justification to exist toward/upon/for the sake of "ALL MEN;" whereas the doctrinal system of Calvinism rejects this teaching.  Thus the Calvinist will seek in some way to change the meaning of "all men" in the second half of Romans 5:18.)

15 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

Thanks for taking time to clarify your position, and for being willing to search the scriptures.This is a large part of what we are to be about . We need to have as much truth as we can to present truth to those outside the Kingdom.

Certainly.  I was more than happy to provide a clear understanding of the Biblical truth from Romans 5:18, in accord with the actual grammar that God the Holy Spirit directly and specifically inspired.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
2 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Certainly.  I was more than happy to provide a clear understanding of the Biblical truth from Romans 5:18, in accord with the actual grammar that God the Holy Spirit directly and specifically inspired.

 

You clarified how you come to your position, but I do not think you have come to truth on it.

 

vs15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

Many...not all men are justified.Jesus in Mt.7 says depart from me, I never at anytime knew you.

There are two federal heads.

People die In Adam or In Christ;

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

 

Same word all, but two groups

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
Posted (edited)
On 5/17/2022 at 10:59 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Certainly.  I was more than happy to provide a clear understanding of the Biblical truth from Romans 5:18, in accord with the actual grammar that God the Holy Spirit directly and specifically inspired.

On 5/17/2022 at 1:46 PM, Iconoclast said:

You clarified how you come to your position, but I do not think you have come to truth on it.

Yet you have not demonstrated grammatically wherein my presentation is wrong concerning that which God the Holy Spirit directly and precisely inspired in Romans 5:18.

On 5/17/2022 at 1:46 PM, Iconoclast said:

vs15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

Many...not all men are justified.Jesus in Mt.7 says depart from me, I never at anytime knew you.

First, the word "many" and the phrase "all men" are NOT the same in meaning.  The phrase "all men" is a precise phrase, whereas the word "many" is a relative word according to any given context.  In a given context the word "many" can be equivalent to the precise phrase "all men," for "all men" can indeed be many of them.  However, the word "many" does not necessarily have to encompass "all," but can mean many among all.  Yet whereas the word "many" could encompass the same group as the phrase "all men," the precise phrase "all men" cannot legitimately be lessened only to include some lesser many among all; for that would require the precise phrase "all men" to cease to mean "all" (which is the exact falsehood that you keep trying to teach).

Second, Romans 5:15 does not directly say anything about men being justified.  Rather, Romans 5:15 talks about "the grace of God" and the gift of God by His grace abounding unto many.  It is Romans 5:16 which informs us that this free gift by God's grace is "unto [unto the purpose of] justification."  Furthermore, it is Romans 5:17 which informs us that those who RECEIVE the abundance of God's grace and of His gift of righteousness/justification "shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ."  Finally, it is Romans 5:19 which informs us that "by the obedience of one," Jesus Christ, MANY (NOT "all men") "shall be made righteous [justified]."  Throughout the discussion you keep being imprecise with the grammatical statements that God the Holy Spirit directly and specifically inspired.  Such imprecision is NOT "rightly dividing the word of truth."

On 5/17/2022 at 1:46 PM, Iconoclast said:

There are two federal heads.

People die In Adam or In Christ;

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Same word all, but two groups

Now we are dealing with a different passage (1 Corinthians 15:22), and thus a different context and a different grammatical construction.  Whereas the grammar of Romans 5:18 emphasizes that which is BY the offence of Adam and BY the righteousness of Christ, the grammar of 1 Corinthians 15:22 focuses upon those who are IN Adam and those who are IN Christ.  Furthermore, whereas the grammar of Romans 5:18 very specifically designates the "all" with the defining phrase "ALL MEN," 1 Corinthians 15:22 designates its usage of "all" in the first half only with the phrase "in Adam" and in the second half only with the phrase "in Christ."  Therefore, the word "all" is designated and defined DIFFERENTLY in these two different contexts.  (You say - "Same word all, but two groups" - and you are accurate for 1 Corinthians 15:22, because the "all" in each phrase of the verse is designated and defined by a different phrase.  However, in Romans 5:18 the grammar does not allow two different groups because the word "all" is designated and defined by the SAME phrase - "ALL MEN" and "ALL MEN.")  Indeed, all in Adam do die; and all in Christ shall be made alive.  On the other hand, by the offence of Adam God's judgment came (exists) upon ALL MEN to condemnation; and by the righteousness of Christ God's free gift came (exists) upon (unto/for the sake of) ALL MEN unto justification of life.  Your attempt to "mash together" these two different contexts continues to demonstrate your imprecision with the grammar that God the Holy Spirit directly and specifically inspired in each case.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 5/16/2022 at 9:32 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Mr. Iconoclast,

Not precisely.  A representative is one who makes decisions on behalf of others.  This is not what Romans 5:12-21 describes.  Rather, Romans 5:12-21 describes two heads whose actions have spiritually affected others.  Throughout the context the others whom their actions have spiritually affected are designated and defined by the terms "all men" in verse 12 and 18 and "many" in verses 15 and 19.

This is Biblically correct according to Romans 6:1-11; Ephesians 2:1-9; etc.  However, do you recognize that throughout the context of Romans 5:12-21 we do not encounter the direct reference to being "in" Adam or "in" Christ at all?  Rather, throughout the context of Romans 5:12-21 the operative emphasis is on the prepositions "by" and "through," that is -- "by" and "through" Adam or "by" and "through" Christ.

Yet there is a very specific statement in the second half of Romans 5:18, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."  So, what does this very specific statement mean?  What does it mean that the free gift came upon all men?  Based upon the phrasing itself, there can only be so many possibilities:

1.  One possibility is that all men receive "justification of life."  Yet we know that this possibility of meaning contradicts the rest of Scripture and thus cannot be the correct meaning.

2.  One possibility is that only all believers receive "justification of life."  Now, concerning the application of justification and regeneration only to believers, this possibility would stand consistent with the rest of Scripture.  However, this possibility also requires us to change the phrase that God the Holy Spirit specifically and direction inspired from "all men" to only "all believers."  Yet God the Holy Spirit did NOT inspire the statement, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all believers unto justification of life."  Rather, God the Holy Spirit DID specifically inspire the statement, "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon ALL MEN unto justification of life."  Attempting to apply this Biblical statement unto any group less than "ALL MEN" is a direct denial of that which God the Holy Spirit Himself specifically and directly inspired.  Therefore, this possibility also cannot be the correct meaning.  (Now thus far, this is the position that you have taken, which has required you to deny and/or alter the "all men" designation that God the Holy Spirit Himself has inspired.)

3.  One possibility is that, not justification of life itself, but the free gift that is unto justification of life has come upon all men as an open offer unto them.  Now, from my understanding this possibility handles the grammar of the statement accurately, without denying or changing any part thereof. 

Note: Grammatically in the Greek the subject and verb for each of the two statements in Romans 5:18 are not specifically present, which is why the King James translation includes them with italics.  Contextually and grammatically the subject and verb for each of the two statements in Romans 5:18 are supplied by the statements of Romans 5:16, wherein the grammatical parallels (which I have highlighted by color coordination) are as follows:

Romans 5:16 - "For the judgment was by one to condemnation."
Romans 5:18 - "Therefore as
by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation."
(In Romans 5:18 the phrase "judgment came" is in italics in the King James translation because it is not directly in the Greek of the verse, but is contextually and grammatically supplied by the earlier statement of Romans 5:16.  Furthermore, the one additional truth that Romans 5:18 supplies is the phrase "upon all men.")

Romans 5:16 - "But the free gift is of many offences unto justification."
Romans 5:18 - "Even so
by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."
(In Romans 5:18 the phrase "the free gift came" is in italics in the King James translation because it is not directly in the Greek of the verse, but is contextually and grammatically supplied by the earlier statement of Romans 5:16.  Furthermore, Romans 5:18 provides three additional thoughts to that of Romans 5:16.  First, whereas Romans 5:16 indicates that the free gift unto justification is "[out] of many offences," Romans 5:18 indicates it is "by the righteousness of one [Christ]."  Second, Romans 5:18 adds the truth that this free gift is "upon all men."  Third, Romans 5:18 indicates that the justification in this free gift is a justification "of life.")

Thus grammatically Romans 5:18 teaches the following:

1.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists (being supplied from Romans 5:16, the verb "came" indicates state of being) by the righteousness of Christ.

2.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists (the verb "came" indicates state of being) "unto" (for the purpose of) "justification of life."

3.  The free gift (of Romans 5:16) exists "upon all men" (herein the preposition "upon" translates the Greek preposition "eis," which means "into, unto, toward, for the sake of.")

Even so, I myself choose to follow option #3 above, because it is the one option which does not contradict the rest of Scripture and which stands true to the specific grammar of Romans 5:18. 

(However, option #3 above is certainly contrary to the doctrinal system of Calvinism, because it would mean that the Lord our God, by the righteous sacrifice of Christ, made His gracious gift of justification to exist toward/upon/for the sake of "ALL MEN;" whereas the doctrinal system of Calvinism rejects this teaching.  Thus the Calvinist will seek in some way to change the meaning of "all men" in the second half of Romans 5:18.)

 

Scott tries to suggest that the all men is equivalent without any distinction which is an impossible scenario. 

He does so by suggesting his grammatical reasoning. 

He then suggests a nebulous offer to all men.

All men ever born died spiritually with Adam at the fall.

All men have not even heard about Jesus even today.

Millions have lived and died before the cross without hearing of this supposed offer .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
20 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

Scott tries to suggest that the all men is equivalent without any distinction which is an impossible scenario. 

He does so by suggesting his grammatical reasoning. 

He then suggests a nebulous offer to all men.

All men ever born died spiritually with Adam at the fall.

All men have not even heard about Jesus even today.

Millions have lived and died before the cross without hearing of this supposed offer .

Care to address the person you TALKING about directly? This wreaks of haughtiness, and is exactly what many of us have come to expect from "Calvinists."  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

Scott tries to suggest that the all men is equivalent without any distinction which is an impossible scenario. 

He does so by suggesting his grammatical reasoning. 

He then suggests a nebulous offer to all men.

All men ever born died spiritually with Adam at the fall.

All men have not even heard about Jesus even today.

Millions have lived and died before the cross without hearing of this supposed offer .

all

[ awl ]

 

adjective
the whole of (used in referring to quantity, extent, or duration):all the cake;all the way;all year.
the whole number of (used in referring to individuals or particulars, taken collectively):all students.
SEE MORE
pronoun
the whole quantity or amount:He ate all of the peanuts. All are gone.
the whole number; every one:
Edited by heartstrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Iconoclast said:

Scott tries to suggest that the all men is equivalent without any distinction which is an impossible scenario. 

He does so by suggesting his grammatical reasoning. 

He then suggests a nebulous offer to all men.

All men ever born died spiritually with Adam at the fall.

All men have not even heard about Jesus even today.

Millions have lived and died before the cross without hearing of this supposed offer .

 

Romans 1: 

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

I'll take that a step further: By your claiming that God has not revealed himself to every(all) men, that God chooses not to reveal His "eternal power and Godhead" to every man and thereby rendering them inexcusable, kind of looks like you too are not glorifying Him as God either. God's very character is Love. He even commands us to "love our enemies" so that we can be like He is. Yet your representation of God does not love his enemies. He is like an indifferent man who "loveth not his brother". That's not the God who saved me. The God of the Bible loved the whole world so much that he gave his only begotten Son for ALL men. His love has no limits. The only limit is our ability to reject His love. That does not make God "ineffectual"; it is his perfect plan for it to be this way.

Edited by heartstrings
clarification
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
10 hours ago, heartstrings said:

 

Romans 1: 

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Quote

I'll take that a step further: By your claiming that God has not revealed himself to every(all) men, that God chooses not to reveal His "eternal power and Godhead" to every man and thereby rendering them inexcusable, kind of looks like you too are not glorifying Him as God either. God's very character is Love.

Men are without excuse because God has revealed Himself By the two lights of Nature and a God given conscience.

This lets them know there is a God but it does not give enough knowledge to be saved.

Everything God is or Has  is revealed to be  HOLY.In Isa.6 he does mnot say, love, love, love, but rather HOLY ,HOLY,HOLY.

God has A HOLY LOVE, A holy wisdom, a holy Omniscience, a holy wrath, a holy justice

10 hours ago, heartstrings said:

 

Quote

He even commands us to "love our enemies" so that we can be like He is. Yet your representation of God does not love his enemies.

We are to speak the truth in love. I do that all the time.

We are to urge them to repent and believe the gospel. I get many opportunities to do that each day.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 30 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • Recent Achievements

    • baptist senior went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • ITJesus earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • ITJesus earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • JenM earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • ITJesus earned a badge
      First Post
  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Barbara Ann

      I am a researcher and writer at Watch Unto Prayer which I started 25 years ago. On this website there are many well-documented articles and audio programs by myself and other researchers whose ministry is to expose the endtime apostasy of the Church. Now more than ever Christians need information in order to identify and avoid the various deceptions that are in nearly all the churches.
      My husband and I attended the IFB Bible Baptist Church of James Knox a couple of years ago. We left the church after we were informed by the assistant pastor that we were not allowed to express views to other members that do not agree with the views of the pastor and leaders of the church. We were not introducing heresy but expressing our views concerning the State of Israel. We had never been in a church which forbade private conversations on issues where there are diverse opinions. This we recognized as cultlike control of church members. To inform Christians, my husband, who is also a researcher and writer, started a website on the subject: Zionism Exposed: A Watchman Ministry.
      · 0 replies
    • Free Spirit

      Jesus said:"I am the truth, the way, and the life. No man can come to The Father, but by Me."
      · 0 replies
    • Richg  »  BrotherTony

      Brother Tony, I read your reply on Anderson, I know you all think I'm argumentative but, when you don't agree.....the first thought I had is, I wish you would introduce me to the guy that hasn't sinned, maybe David, that had a man killed so he could commit adultery, yet, he was & is a man after Gods own heart, or maybe Paul the guy that persecuted and had Christians killed, or maybe Richg or Kent H, or even you ! I used to listen to personalities also when I was younger but today and for some time, my only concern is, does it line up with scripture & to me its hilarious that you think "I'm in a fix" LOL, I interpreted what we've discussed perfectly, not because I'm smart, but because with an open mind to things of God, its an easy read.
      · 1 reply
    • Richg  »  Jerry

      I thought you wanted me to stop talking to you !
      · 0 replies
    • Richg  »  PastorMatt

      Why is it here in 2022 that truth is all of a sudden arrogance ?
      · 0 replies
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...