Dr. Tim wrote: .... the notion that salvation is not available to anyone who will receive ...
I know I said in my last post that it would be my last, but I could not let this horrible lie go unchallenged.
No one who believes in the doctrines of grace says what you've just said. That is a most horrid untruth. I hope you will take the time to find out what the argument actually is instead of making stuff up.
John UK wrote: It is the same message through which some believe and are saved and others do not believe it and are not saved.
I am going to make this my last post.
You are a great deceiver. No one denies that it is the same gospel. But you have changed the gospel to Christ loving every single soul and dying for everyone, which is a false gospel. Now you're stating that it makes no difference what one believes because then you can sit comfortably in your error.
Also, isn't it funny that having denied my earlier statement about your agenda here, you return to that same agenda?
Just be honest with everyone and stop pretending that you believe the doctrines of grace, because you clearly do not.
You are so full of errors and so blinded that no amount of remonstrance even by those who know you will change you. Everything is like water off a duck's back. What a terrible state to reach. May God have mercy on your soul.
John UK wrote: ... Christopher, here's a thought for you. What if you were preaching in the open-air and you quoted John 3:16 without expounding it? Now we know that God inspired scripture, so to quote the scripture must be pleasing to God. Now if we take every conversion in the world since the first century, is it inappropriate to imagine that the word of God played a very important part in every single conversion? And that there will be a vast multitude who are willing to testify that John 3:16 played a very important role in their coming to understand that God loved them, that Christ died for them, and that they could be saved through faith in him?
God may particularize it to someone, because he knows that they are the elect, and may use it to bring them to faith. YOU have no right to do that unless you are now sitting in God's place and know the elect from the non elect.
Shane wrote: And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 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. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. John 3:14‚Ä≠-‚Ä¨17 KJV Bonny... the good news, is the good news. Take care
Thanks Shane. I have no issues with those verses. I do have issues with the interpretation that John UK puts upon them.
I speak of the Lord with everyone I come across. I do not keep count like you do, because I'm not interested in statistics and how many may profess faith because of my little mite.
John UK wrote: Bonny, in less than one minute since my post about your lies, you are coming out with more and more lies. Is your father the devil? Can you really not see that you are lying?
John UK posted 12/19/17 4:47 PM
"Now if you think about it, brother. When you preach the gospel, you are seeking to present The Christ and Him Crucified to your hearers. You might say, "In Christ crucified for sinners, there is an atonement for sin, which can take away YOUR sin and reconcile you to God."
Surely you do?"
Even considering the history of thoughts argued for by John UK on here recently should convince everyone that what I am saying is the truth viz.
1. That in John 3.16 "world" means every single individual 2. That the love spoken of in that text is special saving love and that it must therefore extend to every single individual 3. That the sufficiency of the blood of Christ affords an explanation of the preaching of the gospel to everyone 4. That the propiation of Christ is for sin in general, not the sins of the elect, which led finally to the words I quoted above.
The man is not only deceitful but a liar. ______________
What precisely is the good news? That Christ died for everyone?
Shane wrote: The good news... is good news. No matter who hears it... or doesn't.
In one sense we are agreed on this because the general proclamation of the gospel is indeed good news.
The issue here is different. John wants to be able to lie to individuals by telling them that God loves them in particular and wants to save them and therefore Christ died for them in particular. But the Bible teaches that Christ died only for the elect. So unless John knows their election he may be lying to them.
Sadly, he is of the opinion that unless we can make such pronouncements to individuals then we are not preaching the biblical gospel.
That I believe is the thrust of this thread.
So the question is how does his gospel of lies give any unelect sinner a better hope?
John UK wrote: Okay, it has no problem with me, although why you use the words "difference is", when I also know that God will use this gospel to save his elect. Where is the difference? The answer to your question is simple: No, of course they will not be saved, if they are not elect. God saves his elect. God chooses whom he will save. God is sovereign in both election and application of salvation. ...
What is so difficult about the question I asked that you cannot answer it directly?
Since you now agree that the unelect will not be saved, because God's saving grace will not be extended to them, what is the good news in your gospel for them?
John UK wrote: Bonny, I have asked you a question. Are you unwilling to answer it?
That Christ died to save an innumerable number of sinners from every tribe, tongue and nation and that all who truly repent and believe will be saved.
Difference is that I know that God will use this gospel to draw the elect to himself. I don't need to lie and assure any one of them that God loves them in particular with that special saving love that he has only towards the elect, because for all I know there could be one or more of the unelect.
Are you going to answer my questions?
Do you believe that any that God has not elected will ever be saved?
If not and it takes an initiative of God to save, what is there in your gospel that is good news to them?
You‚Äôre not explaining anything. How is the gospel good news to those who have no ears to hear, no eyes to see, no heart to receive and without God‚Äôs gracious work they will never repent or have faith?
Ladybug wrote: Bearing false witness against Bonny is a sin J.UK, you have done this in the past as well to others. IF you fear God, then bridle your tongue- "Don't speak evil against each other, brethren" (James 4:11).
Thank you sister for your support. I do not expect any different from someone who, despite professing to believe in grace, is still rebelling against it and trying desperately to invent a gospel that is acceptable to himself and that he thinks will be more acceptable to the lost. Tragic.
John UK wrote: "Calvin observes on this text, "Christ brought life, because the heavenly Father loves the human race, and wishes that they should not perish."
I take it you understand by the human race every single individual? If so, what is stoping him from fulfilling his wish? Let me guess, he is not sovereign and almighty?
John UK wrote: Again he says, "Christ employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite indiscriminately all to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such also is the import of the term world. Though there is nothing in the world that is worthy of God‚Äôs favor, yet He shows Himself to be reconciled to the whole world, when he invites all men without exception to the faith of Christ." The same view of God‚Äôs "love" and the "world," in this text, is taken by Brentius, Bucer, Calovinius, Glassius, Chemnitius, Musculus, Bullinger, Bengal, Nifanius, Dyke, Scott, Henry, and Manton.‚ÄĚ Ryle
The offer is universal, but it does not mean that Christ died for every single individual, which is what you're constantly grasping for. That's your false theology!
‚Äė "The general love of God toward mankind is so clearly testified in Holy Scripture, and so demonstrated by the manifold effects of God's goodness and mercy extended to every particular man in this world, that to doubt thereof were infidelity, and to deny it plain blasphemy." ‚Äď Davenant's Answer to Hoard, p. 1. ‚Äô" Ryle ---- There you go, Bonny. In danger of blasphemy you are. You see how much I care about you?
You read stuff and it goes straight over your head.
No one is denying the "general love" and pity of God to every single individual which provides rain, seasons etc. BUT this does not translate into special saving love to every single individual which is what you want to be able to preach to individual sinners. This "other gospel" that you want to preach is what is blasphemous because you present a defeated and desperate God appealing to sinners to not make the death of his son of none effect. Pathetic.
Your fairy tale gospel is totally foreign to the Bible. Shame you can't see it.
John UK wrote: cont. Those who confine God‚Äôs love exclusively to the elect appear to me to take a narrow and contracted view of God‚Äôs character and attributes. They refuse to God that attribute of compassion with which even an earthly father can regard a profligate son, and can offer to him pardon, even though his compassion is despised and his offers refused.
Then the good Bishop has just contradicted himself and you'd rather ignore this because it supports your error. How convenient!
John UK wrote: It is a love unquestionably distinct and separate from the special love with which God regards His saints. It is a love of pity and not of approbation or complaisance.
How does that help your evangelism? You still can't say to any one sinner God loves YOU in particular in a saving way, or that he died for YOU to forgive YOUR sins!! Even Ryle would jump down your throat if you attribute such sentiments to him.
You're desperately grasping at every straw to justify your errors. How sad.
It is unfair to insist that it means every human being now living, for every other passage in the New Testament where God‚Äôs love is mentioned limits it to His own people ‚ÄĒ search and see! The objects of God‚Äôs love in John 3:16 are precisely the same as the objects of Christ‚Äôs love in John 13:1: "Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that His time was come, that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved His own which were in the world, He loved them unto the end." We may admit that our interpretation of John 3:16 is no novel one invented by us, but one almost uniformly given by the Reformers and Puritans, and many others since them. (The Sovereignty of God- A W Pink)
The attempt to make the work of Christ of benefit to every single individual shows the contempt of such a person for the true gospel. In this case it comes as no surprise that the same person is now arguing for a decisionistic kind of faith. He sure does like to make a spectacle of himself.