R. K. Borill wrote: They are right. Jesus did not die for the atheist.
Willy Mullan once preached on the following verse...
Isaiah 53:5 KJV 5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
...and said that Jesus died for those who know they are transgressors and are repentant and believing.
The fact that this group put "sins" in inverted commas shows that they do not believe in sins, which precludes them from the cure. It's a bit like saying that no-one gets sick, therefore medicine is a myth.
Poor dabs. They will still have to face the LORD at the Judgment Seat of Christ. This will be a big shock to their atheistical philosophy. No banners there, just weeping and wailing before they are hurled into the lake of fire, to join the devil who deceived them.
Proverbs 14:12 KJV 12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
So what do we do in such a case? Just let him carry on in his deception? Say to ourselves, "Well, I have to work out my own salvation, no time for anyone else, let him die and go to hell but when I die I shall go to heaven, and the sooner the better."
Strat, do you need prayer? Are you suffering so much? There are many brethren here who will pray for you if you ask. Many are already praying for you without being asked. This is Christianity in action, seeking the Lord.
Strat wrote: The bible says to work out YOUR salvation with fear and trembling,not the salvation of others with endless dabating,i am not commanded to sweat or obsess over the salvation of Bloomberg or anyone else. When did Christianity become about debating who is saved and who isn't...we'll all find out in the end.
Strat, Are you referring to me? Is there something amiss in my witnessing? I am always willing to learn, you know. Let me tell you the scenario, and then you can tell me how to go about helping this individual.
Moniker Man thinks that salvation floats down from heaven, such that suddenly he gets a goosebump, and declares, "Oooh, I think I've been saved."
Or Moniker Man was baptised as a baby, thus he thinks that on account of that, he is now in the covenant of grace, because his baptism is a sign and seal of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, and all the blessings of salvation.
But Moniker Man does not accept that he has to believe in Christ to be justified. He does not imagine repentance to be a correct response to the gospel. He rather wants to do nothing, so that God is glorified better.
I am not "debating". I am preaching the gospel. I am preaching Christ crucified. I want folks to be saved.
Baptist wrote: God believes and repents for us, so that we don't need to make any response of course. Makes a nonsense of "...And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent" but we don't need to worry about what God commands, because he is not expecting a response. That is why he commands repentance, so that we can all ignore it. That is called being a good Presbyterian.
Maybe that's why he never responds to questions.
But it's more likely he's going through all his big tomes to find the response of someone else. Moniker Man needs to read through the whole Bible, it will do him a lot more good.
searching Q wrote: John UK I notice you completely ignore....
I notice you completely ignore my request not to go into the mechanics, or what is at the back of salvation. We all know this off pat. What you really need is the "response" part.
Have another try, and cease your ignoring of my posts.
I won't go on to another text until you have understood this basic verse of scripture. It could mean the difference between salvation and reprobation for you. It is a serious business, and I am deadly in earnest for your salvation. Unless, of course, you have actually believed on Christ and repented of your sins, and received Christ as your Saviour and Lord?
searching Q wrote: God has to receive a "response" BEFORE election is granted? Wow. Is your god not sovereign?
Okay, well if you wish to debate the biblical position on whether or not a response is required for salvation, maybe we should go into this and see what the Bible has to say about it, eh?
And then, if your hope is a false hope, maybe we can help you find your way to the strait gate, and help you in. But it will take some striving on your part, as I am already in, praise God!
Let us begin:
John 1:11-13 KJV 11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 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.
Here we have:
1. Some "received him not".
2. Some "received him", they "believed on his name".
The first group were not saved. The second group were saved. Let us just focus on this for the moment, RATHER THAN the mechanics. I know all about what was at the back of this, as you well know.
Now I have to go out for half hour. Is that enough time for you to reply? I will look in shortly.
Michael Hranek wrote: John UK Me too! Because honestly not all "reformed" turn themselves into 'benevolent religious tyrannts' out to control others in their faith. Some like Spurgeon urged faith in Christ. Other exhort people to read the Scriptures for themselves. Still others pour their hearts out to God in prayer and a famous for telling the lost of Christ. I am not speaking of such.
Thank you bro. I think the Lord would have us without hypocrisy, and that the letter of the law is no subsititute for the spirit of the law. Churchianity never did cut it with the Lord, as history proves. The only thing that counts is a new creature, a circumcised heart, dead to self, and wholeheartedly for the Lord. The one who takes up his cross is a man who is not going home.
Amos 5:21-24 KJV 21 I hate, I despise your feast days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies. 22 Though ye offer me burnt offerings and your meat offerings, I will not accept them: neither will I regard the peace offerings of your fat beasts. 23 Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; for I will not hear the melody of thy viols.
24 But let judgment run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream.
Michael Hranek wrote: Dorcas John UK In considering how, 'The Devil is here, even in the 21st Century', and the comments on this thread and others. I am concerned there is a real 'devil', a spirit in and behind what I am calling "Reformed Priestcraft" If those in church leadership actually lifted up the immeasurable importance of the word of God in the life of believers, and sought to teach them to personally read the Bible for all its worth, IMHO we would see an enmormous decrease in the abuse of verses such as Matt 19:14 to propagandize infant sprinklings, and other garbage as well________and a great increase in people's lives of the reality of John 8:31,32...If you abide in My word "Reformed Priestcraft" IMHO seeks to divert people from what Scripture actually says, to what they want to make Scripture say to conform to their system of theology, and bring people into and under their bondage. This is something the RCC, the cults and false religions do. Keep people from reading the word of God for themselves, get them 'dependant' (enslaved/addicted) to their own teachings.
Dorcas wrote: Concerning Matthew 19:14-------------------------- "To this we give this one word, see that ye read the Word as it is written, and you will find no water in it but the Lord Jesus only. Are the water and Christ the same thing? Is bringing a child to a font bringing the child to Christ? Nay, here is a wide difference, as wide as between false doctrine and the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ". C.H. Spurgeon
Herein lies the heart of the matter. When some folks read their Bible, they seem to see things which just aren't there.
Thanks Dorcas for posting the quote, always good to see Ingleesi in print, always a blessing.
Mike wrote: Luke says Herod reads the Jews, and notes that they are pleased with the killing of James.(Acts 12:3) He, popularity seeking politician that he is, decides to do the same for Peter. But being the days of unleavened bread, "then were the days of unleavened bread..." he decides to wait until after Passover, and puts him in prison until then. Why? Because it is the Jews he wants to please, not Christians, and it wouldn't be pleasing to the Jews to dirty up the Passover feast days, not Easter, with a public execution. This feast lasts several days. See also that Luke uses the terms "feast of unleavened bread" and "the Passover" interchangeably in Luke 22:1.
Thank you Mike, good post, covers all bases. I'm glad this subject comes up every year, as it gives us all a chance to rethink our position to ensure it is the correct one.
The KJV-Onlyists have written many articles about why the KJV is correct in translating the "passover" word Easter, but really it is just clutching at straws, when thought is given to the passage. If "passover" was always considered separate from the subsequent feast, they would have a point, but it isn't.
The Scottish Baptist minister knew that the gospel message was a very simple one, and preached it to the last. Salvation can occur in a matter of seconds, when there are only seconds to go, and I like his choice of text: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."
Moody Church never did get to hear their possible new pastor.