PDA

View Full Version : The Timing of Justification and Imputation



Pages : 1 [2]

lionovjudah
02-10-06, 03:41 PM
I am surprised you would say that Joe. Elijah indeed went to heaven. All elect saints prior to Christ's death on the cross are in heaven. As well all reprobate wicked went to hell prior to Christ's death on the cross.

First of all Ray. If you searched the writ. Heaven does not always mean the same place. Now I have researched this. I believe there are 3 places mentioned.


This is sloppy exegesis Joe. What in fact did Elisha say to the men? Did he not tell them NOT to go searching for Elijah. What? Will you now exhibit vanity as well and think Elijah at that time was still walking the earth, it was just that the Lord placed him elsewhere for now? LOL.

If you read what i said, I do not know exactly where he went, but he was not in Heaven rasied with Christ. At the throne of God. How do you explain this Ray:

Elijah's letter was written after the whirlwind took him up. THis letter was written 10 years after that event. How can this be accoridng to you thinking he was in heaven? Please do tell

Take some time and just try to answer this for once.




You skirt Moses though dont you? What of him? Has he also broken from the secret grave where the Lord placed him and started walking the earth patiently waiting for Christ to die on the cross and be resurrected so that he could then go to heaven. LOL .

Why must you mock? Nowhere have I sated thus. All I said is He was not in the heaven at the throne of God.


It seems the mysticism of Rome has nothing on you.

Maybe the incense too. Better than the prc kool aid though


You and Harold both think this.This is a road block for you. Why?? Both of you now have asked for Scriptures to prove this. I do and you write it off. That is quite something. Will you write off the parable of Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham? Remember what Abraham said. "They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them." You both seem to have all the knowledge in the world to answer any other question under the sun, yet now are quiet. Hmmmmm.

Quiet about what? I said Abes boosom is not heaven. What does this have to do with proving they are in heaven at the throne of God? I have no clue.

Did you even take the time to consider a commentary from Gill or Calvin here and see what these learned men commented on the text? Oh thats right... Harold has no need for Calvin, and you have no need for Gill. That is telling. Lets rely on the epistle of Paul alone using the Greek text and by George if the answer is not to be gotten here, it plainly does not exist.


Blinder Theology.:mad:

Canuck mentality. Too many hockey pucks against the head. Another one of your over used buzz words. Throw it in the lake of fire with breaking wind, dung, babbler, babbling etc etc etc.


I know my Redeemer liveth. Job knew it, Abraham knew it. When they physically died they went into that blessed covenant fellowship with the Triune Lord, thats right , including with Jesus Christ. Righteousness was imputed to them lone before they were even born. God viewed them as Justified and His determinate will accomplished, not frustrated in time. Also what about the reprobate wicked in the old testament? Where did they go? Yes that is right , they went to hell. They were not imputed with the righteousness of Christ, they were not viewed as Justified by the Lord through Christ, and never was that the Lord's determinate counsel for them. They are not having a comfy soul sleep. They are NOT in covenant fellowship with the Lord. They are without Christ.

A lot of words here, but they say nothing important. Too bad this cannot be supported one bit from the writ. You have gone farther than the word allows and will be chastized for this. Imputed with righteoussness before law was in effect? How long muct we do this dance. Are you saying the rose bodily now?


I suggest you read the article I posted form Trott. But most importantly, read the writ and actually attempt to form an argument based on scripture and not some "logical conclucion" please. It is embarrasing.

I know about His eternal Love ray. Reading it 400 times is not going to convince me of this.

Christs sheep, past and present, were justified at the cross. And until you and others realize this, you are against the reveled word, the Whole council as you state. Which I will make a crack about. You scream whole council all the time, yet use 3 verses in the writ for every answer.

You want to guard the Sovereignty of God, as if he put you as watchman on the wingham wall. You will not address any texts I have provided, instead recite Job

harald
02-10-06, 04:27 PM
It would appear to me from eph 1:3,4 Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly [places] in Christ According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: from this verse I would conclude that justification was before the foundation of the world, for it is one of the elects spiritual blessings !
(beloved57)

Paul uses the noun "justification" twice in his epistles, in Rom. 4:25 and then in Romans 5. In none of those instances is eternity in view. Eph. 1:3-4 does not state justification before God to have taken place before the foundation of the world. The formula "in heavenly (places) in Christ" does not mean the same as "before the foundation of the world". The word which e.g. KJV rendered "heavenly (places)" is epouranios. It means "third-heavenly". Here it is preceeded by the article, and is in the plural, thus lit. "in the third-heavenlies in Christ". With Paul the word "third-heavenlies", when Christ is involved, always refers to a post-resurrection thing, not to something before the foundation of the world. A word study of epouranios in Paul's epistles, when Christ is involved in the same context, will verify this.
Then, the "according as" is kathoos, "in keeping with how". Thus lit. "...with every spiritual blessing in the third-heavenlies in Christ, in keeping with how He for himself [middle voice] chose...". SO, God's blessing the "faithful in Christ Jesus" (v. 1:1) with every spiritual blessing in the third-heavenlies in Christ was in keeping with His election "before [the] foundation of [the] world", i.e. the said blessing hearkened back to God the Father's sovereign choosing. The blessing with every blessing was a post-resurrection and post-ascension thing. In context it only pertains to the non-nation, i.e. the body of the Christ (to which Ephesians so-called was exclusively addressed). Not to Israel, nor to "the righteous nations", the last (as to logical order) of the three households to be chosen to salvation.
Then, the "holy and without blame" etc. pertains to the glorified state of Body saints. Because of the fact that "without blame" is strictly speaking "without internal blemish". And because of the fact that katenoopion autou is strictly speaking "before His very eyes". Which formula refers to being in God's very personal presence.


Harald

ray kikkert
02-10-06, 04:44 PM
First of all Ray. If you searched the writ. Heaven does not always mean the same place. Now I have researched this. I believe there are 3 places mentioned.

Gill's exposition:

2 Kings 2:11 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#11)

Ver. 11. And it came to pass, as they still went on and talked,.... About the donation of the gifts of the Spirit requested, about the state of religion in Israel, and about the training up of prophets in the colleges, and about Elisha's succession as a prophet in his room, and his discharge of that office, and such like things, as may be supposed, in which he gave him instruction and advice:

that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire; either angels in this form, see Ps 104:4 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Psalms/104.html#4), in which they appeared for the glory and honour of the prophet, and as emblems of his flaming love and zeal for the purity of religion, and that his assumption might be conspicuous to Elisha; and perhaps by this means might be seen by the fifty men on the other side Jordan: this chariot, drawn with these horses, was not seen in the heaven, but as running on the earth, and came between the two prophets, and separated them from each other, taking up Elijah into it by means of a wind whirling about him, and which was no other than the ministry of angels; or these might be a conflux of exhalations or clouds, formed in this likeness by a supernatural power, and, by the solar rays striking on them, might appear fiery or red; and so his assumption was much in such like manner as our Lord was taken up in a cloud, Ac 1:9 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Acts/1.html#9),

and Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven; body and soul; such a change passing on him, as he went through the region of the air, which divested him of his mortality and corruption, and fitted him for the invisible world.





If you read what i said, I do not know exactly where he went, but he was not in Heaven rasied with Christ. At the throne of God. How do you explain this Ray:

Gill's exposition:

2 Kings 2:16 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#16)

Ver. 16. And they said unto him, behold, now, there be with thy servants fifty strong men,.... Perhaps meaning themselves, 2Ki 2:7 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#7) who were young, stout, and strong, and able to travel for days together:

let them go, we pray thee, and seek thy master; for though they knew he was to be taken away, yet knew not for what time, and imagined he might be found again:

lest peradventure the Spirit of the Lord hath taken him up; as it seems he was wont to do, see 1Ki 18:12 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/1_Kings/18.html#12)

and cast him upon some mountain, or into some valley; where he sometimes had his abode; or they might fancy, if he was taken up to heaven, yet in his soul only, and that, when that was separated, his dead body would be left on a mountain, or in a valley; and therefore they were desirous of seeking and finding it, that it might not be exposed to birds and beasts of prey, but that they might bury it in a decent and honourable manner:

and he said, ye shall not send; he knew it was to no purpose, since he was translated to heaven, body and soul, and which he was an eyewitness of.


2 Kings 2:17 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#17)

Ver. 17. And when they urged him until he was ashamed,.... To deny them any longer, being so very pressing and importunate:

he said, send; lest they should think he had not the respect for his master he should have had; or was so fond of his office, that he did not choose he should be found alive if he could, and return and reassume it:

they sent therefore fifty men; some one way, and some another:

and they sought three days, but found him not; and then returned.


2 Kings 2:18 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#18)

Ver. 18. And when they came again to him, for he tarried at Jericho,.... Waiting their return to hear the report they made: which when they had,

he said unto them, did I not say unto you, go not? assuring them it would be fruitless, and to no purpose; though this search of theirs served both to confirm the assumption of Elijah, and the truth of Elisha being a prophet of the Lord.




Elijah's letter was written after the whirlwind took him up. THis letter was written 10 years after that event. How can this be accoridng to you thinking he was in heaven? Please do tell

Take some time and just try to answer this for once.

You have yet to give evidence of this.





Why must you mock? Nowhere have I sated thus. All I said is He was not in the heaven at the throne of God.

Gill's exposition:

and Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven; body and soul; such a change passing on him, as he went through the region of the air, which divested him of his mortality and corruption, and fitted him for the invisible world.





Maybe the incense too. Better than the prc kool aid though

"But refuse profane and old wive's fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness" 1 Tim. 4:7




Quiet about what? I said Abes boosom is not heaven. What does this have to do with proving they are in heaven at the throne of God? I have no clue.

Gill's exposition:

and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: by Abraham's bosom is meant heaven, a phrase well known to the Jews, by which they commonly expressed the happiness of the future state: of Abraham's happy state they had no doubt; and when they spake of the happiness of another's, they sometimes signified it by going to Abraham; as when the mother of the seven sons, slain by Caesar, saw her youngest going to be sacrificed {p}

"she fell upon him, and embraced him, and kissed him, and said unto him, my son, Mkyba Mhrba lua Kl, "go to Abraham, your father", and tell him, thus saith my mother, &c.''

and sometimes, as here, by being in his bosom. So it is said {q}, that Eliezer his servant (Abraham's, the same name with Lazarus)
wqyxb hnwm, "is laid in his bosom": and which may refer to the account in the Talmud {r}, that when R. Benaah, the painter of caves, came to the cave of Abraham, he found Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, hymq yaqd, "standing before him". And it is also said {s} of Rabbi, when he died, Mhrba lv wqyxb bvwy Mwyh, "this day he sits in the bosom of Abraham"; for as it was usual with them to represent the joys of heaven by a feast, so the partaking of them, by sitting down at a table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; see Mt 8:11 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Matthew/8.html#11) and as their manner at meals was by lying along on couches at eating; he that lay next another might be said to lie, or lean, in his bosom: hence Abraham's bosom came to signify the near and intimate enjoyment of happiness with him in the other world. The ascension of Christ is expressed by a being "carried up into heaven",



A lot of words here, but they say nothing important. Too bad this cannot be supported one bit from the writ. You have gone farther than the word allows and will be chastized for this. Imputed with righteoussness before law was in effect? How long muct we do this dance. Are you saying the rose bodily now?

Gill's exposition:

Job 19:25 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/19.html#25)

Ver. 25. For I know,.... The particle w, which is sometimes rendered by the copulative "and", by an adversative "but", and sometimes as a causal particle "for", should not be rendered here by either; but as an explanative, "to wit", or "namely", as it is by Noldius {y}; in connection with the preceding words; in which Job wishes some words of his were written in a book, or engrossed on sheets of lead, or were cut out on some rock, and particularly were engraved on his tombstone; "namely", these following, "I know that my Redeemer liveth", &c. and to this agrees Broughton, "how that my Redeemer liveth"; let these be the words written, engraved, and cut out there: by my Redeemer, he means not any mere man that should rise up and vindicate him; for the account of his then living, and of his standing on the earth in the latter day, will not agree with such an one; nor God the Father, to whom the character of a Redeemer is seldom or ever given, nor did he ever appear or stand on earth, nor was his shape seen at any time, Joh 5:37 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/John/5.html#37); but the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, who is our "Goel", the word here used, our near kinsman, and so our Redeemer, to whom the right of redemption belonged; and who was spoken of by all the holy prophets, from the beginning of the world, as the Redeemer of his people, who should redeem them from all their sins; from the law, its curses and condemnation; from Satan, and his principalities and powers; from death and hell, and everlasting destruction; and that by giving himself a ransom for them; all which was known in the times of Job, Job 33:24 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/33.html#24); and known by him, who speaks of him as living; he then existed not only as a divine Person, as he did from all eternity, but in his office capacity as Mediator, and under the character of a Redeemer; for the virtue of his future redemption reached to all the ages before it, from the foundation of the world; besides, the epithet "living" points at him as the "living God", as he is, Heb 3:12 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Hebrews/3.html#12); and so equal to the work of redemption, and able to redeem, and mighty to save; of whom it is said, not that he has lived, or shall live, but "liveth"; ever lives; and so an expression of the eternity of Christ, who is from everlasting to everlasting, the same today, yesterday, and for ever; and who, though he died in human nature, yet is alive, and lives for evermore; he has life in and of himself, as he is God over all blessed for ever; and has life in him for all his people, as Mediator; and is the author of spiritual life in them, and the donor of eternal life to them; and because he lives, they shall live also. Now Job had an interest in him as the living Redeemer, and knew he had, which is the greatest blessing that can be enjoyed; an interest in Christ is of infinitely more worth than the whole world, and the knowledge of it exceeds all others; this knowledge was not merely speculative, nor only approbational and fiducial, though such Job had, Job 13:15 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/13.html#15); but the knowledge of assurance of interest; to know Christ as a Redeemer of men, and not our Redeemer, is of no avail; the devils know him to be a Redeemer, but not theirs: men may have an interest in Christ, and as yet not know it; interest is before knowledge; it is neither knowledge nor faith that gives interest, but God of his grace gives both interest and knowledge: and such a knowledge as here expressed is a peculiar favour; it is owing to an understanding given to know him that is true, and that we are in him that is true; and to the spirit of wisdom and revelation, in the knowledge of Christ, and to the testimony which he bears; and such knowledge will support under the greatest afflictions and sorest trials; under the ill usage of friends, and the loss of nearest and dearest relations, and in the views of death and eternity; all which was Job's case:

and [that] he shall stand at the latter [day] upon the earth; appear in the world in human nature; be the seed of the woman, and born of one, be made flesh, and dwell among men, and converse with them, as Jesus did; who stood upon the land of Judea, and walked through Galilee, and went about doing good to the bodies and souls of men; and this was in the last days, and at the end of the world, Heb 1:1 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Hebrews/1.html#1); as a pledge of this there were frequent appearances of the son of God in an human form to the patriarchs; nor need it seem strange that Job, though not an Israelite, had knowledge of the incarnation of Christ, when it is said to {z} be the opinion of the Indian Brahmans that God often appeared in the form and habit of some great men, and conversed among men; and that Wistnavius, whom, they say, is the second Person of the triune God, had already assumed a body nine times, and sometimes also an human one; and that the same will once more be made by him; and Confucius, the Chinese philosopher {a}, left it in writing, that the Word would be made flesh, and foresaw the year when it would be: or, "he shall rise the last out of the earth" {b}; and so it may respect his resurrection from the dead; he was brought to the dust of death, and was laid in the grave, and buried, in the earth, and was raised out of it; and whose resurrection is of the greatest moment and importance, the justification, regeneration, and resurrection of his people depending on it: but this is not to be understood as if he was the last that should rise from the dead; for he is the firstfruits of them that sleep, and the firstborn from the dead, the first that rose to an immortal life; but that he who, as to his divine nature, is the first and the last; or that, in his state of humiliation, is the last, the meanest, and most abject of men {c}; or rather, who, as the public and federal head of his people, is "the last Adam", 1Co 15:45 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/1_Corinthians/15.html#45); and who did rise as such for their justification, which makes the article of his resurrection an unspeakable benefit: or, "he shall stand over the earth in the latter day" {d} in the last times of all, in the close of time, at the end of the world, at his appearing and kingdom, when he shall come to judge the quick and dead; those that will be alive, and those that will be raised from the dead, who will meet him in the air over the earth, and shall be for ever with him; and even then "he shall stand upon the earth"; for it is expressly said, that when he shall come, and all the saints with him, "his feet shall stand on the mount of Olives", Zec 14:4 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Zechariah/14.html#4); or, "he shall stand against the earth at the latter days" {e}; in the resurrection morn, and shall exercise his authority over it, and command the earth and sea to give up their dead; and when at his all commanding voice the dead shall come out of their graves, as Lazarus came out of his, he shall stand then upon the dust of the earth, and tread upon it as a triumphant Conqueror, having subdued all his enemies, and now the last enemy, death, is destroyed by the resurrection of the dead: what a glorious and enlarged view had Job of the blessed Redeemer!

{y} ynaw "nempe ego", Nold. Ebr. Concord. Partic. p. 696. No. 1750. {z} Huet. Alnetan. Quaest. l. 2. c. 13. p. 234. {a} Martin. Sinic. Hist. l. 4. p. 131. {b} Mwqy rpe le Nwrxaw "qui postremus ex palvere (terra) surget", Nold. ib. {c} "Novissimus", i.e. "miserrimus et abjectus", Bolducius; "sic ultimus miserorum", Ciceron. Orat. pro Flacco 24. {d} "Supra pulverem", Cocceius, Schultens. {e} "Adhibebit suam vim pulveri", Tigurine version.


Job 19:26 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/19.html#26)

Ver. 26. And though after my skin [worms] destroy this ,.... Meaning not, that after his skin was wholly consumed now, which was almost gone, there being scarce any left but the skin of his teeth,
Job 19:20 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/19.html#20); the worms in his ulcers would consume what was left of his body, which scarce deserved the name of a body, and therefore he points to it, and calls it "this", without saying what it was; but that when he should be entirely stripped of his skin in the grave, then rottenness and worms would strip him also of all the rest of his flesh and his bones; by which he expresses the utter consumption of his body by death, and after it in the grave; and nevertheless, though so it would be, he was assured of his resurrection from the dead:

yet in my flesh shall I see God: he believed, that though he should die and moulder into dust in the grave, yet he should rise again, and that in true flesh, not in an aerial celestial body, but in a true body, consisting of flesh, blood, and bones, which spirits have not, and in the same flesh or body he then had, his own flesh and body, and not another's; and so with his fleshly or corporeal eyes see God, even his living Redeemer, in human nature; who, as he would stand upon the earth in that nature, in the fulness of time, and obtain redemption for him, so he would in the latter day appear again, raise him from the dead, and take him to himself, to behold his glory to all eternity: or "out of my flesh" {f}, out of my fleshly eyes; from thence and with those shall I behold God manifest in the flesh, my incarnate God; and if Job was one of those saints that rose when Christ did, as some say {g}, he saw him in the flesh and with his fleshly eyes.

{f} yrvbm "e carne mea", Tigurine version, Mercerus, Piscator, Cocceius, Schmidt, Schultens; so Gussetius, p. 446. {g} "Suidas in voce" iwb, & Sept. in ch. xlii. 17.


[B]Job 19:27 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/19.html#27)

Ver. 27. Whom I shall see for myself,.... For his pleasure and profit, to his great advantage and happiness, and to his inexpressible joy and satisfaction, see Ps 17:15 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Psalms/17.html#15);

and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; or "a stranger" {h}; these very selfsame eyes of mine I now see with will behold this glorious Person, God in my nature, and not the eyes of another, of a strange body, a body not my own; or as I have seen him with my spiritual eyes, with the eyes of faith and knowledge, as my living Redeemer, so shall I see him with my bodily eyes after the resurrection, and enjoy uninterrupted communion with him, which a stranger shall not; one that has never known anything of him, or ever intermeddled with the joy of saints here, such shall not see him hereafter, at least with pleasure; like Balaam, they may see him, but not nigh, may behold him, but afar off: though "my reins be consumed within me"; or "in my bosom";

[though]; this word may be left out, and be read,

my reins are consumed within me; or, "within my bosom" {i}; and both being the seat of the affections and desires, may signify his most earnest and eager desire after the state of the resurrection of the dead; after such a sight of God in his flesh, of the incarnate Redeemer, he believed he should have, insomuch that it ate up his spirits, as the Psalmist says, zeal for the house of God ate up his,
Ps 69:9 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Psalms/69.html#9); it was not the belief of restoration of health, and to his former outward happiness, and a deliverance from his troubles, and a desire after that, which is here expressed; for he had no faith in that, nor hope, nor expectation of it, as appears by various expressions of his; but much greater, more noble, more refined enjoyments, were experienced by him now, and still greater he expected hereafter; and his words concerning these were what he wished were written, and printed, and engraven; which, if they only respected outward happiness, he would never have desired; and though he had not his wish in his own way, yet his words are written and printed in a better book than he had in his view, and will outlast engravings with an iron pen on sheets of lead, or marble rocks. The Vulgate Latin version seems to incline to this sense,

"this here is laid up in my bosom,''

that is, of seeing God in my flesh; so the Tigurine version, rather as a paraphrase than a version, "which is my only desire".

{h} rz "alienus", Pagninus, Montanus, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Mercerus; "extraneus", Drusius. {i} yqxb "in sinu meo", Pagninus, Montanus, &c.

harald
02-10-06, 05:01 PM
A question to anyone who maintains "God's elect" were "imputed with Christ's righteousness" prior to Christ's being on the tree: How do you, in light of your belief, explain 2Cor. 5:21, "hina heemeis genoometha dikaiosunee Theou en autoo", lit. "to the end that precisely we would become righteousness of God in him" ?

Any takers?


Harald

jmgipson
02-10-06, 06:38 PM
All OT saints were justified because of the faithfullness of God and them looking forward to the promise.

Here is an article I found that speaks much better than I on the subject.

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Lake/8890/grace/trottsjustification.html

Joe,
Isn't this guy Mike Krall webmaster of Phil Johnsons site? Is he preterist (I think I spelled this right)?

John

Brandan
02-10-06, 06:40 PM
I know Mike very well. He's not a webmaster for Phil Johnson. He's a hyper - but he is a full preterist

jmgipson
02-10-06, 06:51 PM
I know Mike very well. He's not a webmaster for Phil Johnson. He's a hyper - but he is a full preterist

Yea. Now I see he is webmaster at Pristine Grace.

John

lionovjudah
02-10-06, 07:34 PM
Joe,
Isn't this guy Mike Krall webmaster of Phil Johnsons site? Is he preterist (I think I spelled this right)?

John

It is from his sight John. But the article is written by Samuel Trott. Did you read it?

jmgipson
02-10-06, 07:36 PM
Our Union with Christ stretches from eternity to eternity, though not in the same way.

How can Eph. 1:4 say that we were in Christ from eternity past, and yet 2:12 says that before conversion we were "separate from Christ"? The answer to this and imputation and justification in eternity I am convinced as Michael Hughes states on his web page are two different modes of our union with Christ: Objective union and subjective union. I can see no other way.

John

Joe, yes I did.

lionovjudah
02-10-06, 07:36 PM
Gill's exposition:

2 Kings 2:11 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#11)

Ver. 11. And it came to pass, as they still went on and talked,.... About the donation of the gifts of the Spirit requested, about the state of religion in Israel, and about the training up of prophets in the colleges, and about Elisha's succession as a prophet in his room, and his discharge of that office, and such like things, as may be supposed, in which he gave him instruction and advice:

that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire; either angels in this form, see Ps 104:4 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Psalms/104.html#4), in which they appeared for the glory and honour of the prophet, and as emblems of his flaming love and zeal for the purity of religion, and that his assumption might be conspicuous to Elisha; and perhaps by this means might be seen by the fifty men on the other side Jordan: this chariot, drawn with these horses, was not seen in the heaven, but as running on the earth, and came between the two prophets, and separated them from each other, taking up Elijah into it by means of a wind whirling about him, and which was no other than the ministry of angels; or these might be a conflux of exhalations or clouds, formed in this likeness by a supernatural power, and, by the solar rays striking on them, might appear fiery or red; and so his assumption was much in such like manner as our Lord was taken up in a cloud, Ac 1:9 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Acts/1.html#9),

and Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven; body and soul; such a change passing on him, as he went through the region of the air, which divested him of his mortality and corruption, and fitted him for the invisible world.






Gill's exposition:

2 Kings 2:16 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#16)

Ver. 16. And they said unto him, behold, now, there be with thy servants fifty strong men,.... Perhaps meaning themselves, 2Ki 2:7 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#7) who were young, stout, and strong, and able to travel for days together:

let them go, we pray thee, and seek thy master; for though they knew he was to be taken away, yet knew not for what time, and imagined he might be found again:

lest peradventure the Spirit of the Lord hath taken him up; as it seems he was wont to do, see 1Ki 18:12 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/1_Kings/18.html#12)

and cast him upon some mountain, or into some valley; where he sometimes had his abode; or they might fancy, if he was taken up to heaven, yet in his soul only, and that, when that was separated, his dead body would be left on a mountain, or in a valley; and therefore they were desirous of seeking and finding it, that it might not be exposed to birds and beasts of prey, but that they might bury it in a decent and honourable manner:

and he said, ye shall not send; he knew it was to no purpose, since he was translated to heaven, body and soul, and which he was an eyewitness of.


2 Kings 2:17 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#17)

Ver. 17. And when they urged him until he was ashamed,.... To deny them any longer, being so very pressing and importunate:

he said, send; lest they should think he had not the respect for his master he should have had; or was so fond of his office, that he did not choose he should be found alive if he could, and return and reassume it:

they sent therefore fifty men; some one way, and some another:

and they sought three days, but found him not; and then returned.


2 Kings 2:18 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Kings/2.html#18)

Ver. 18. And when they came again to him, for he tarried at Jericho,.... Waiting their return to hear the report they made: which when they had,

he said unto them, did I not say unto you, go not? assuring them it would be fruitless, and to no purpose; though this search of theirs served both to confirm the assumption of Elijah, and the truth of Elisha being a prophet of the Lord.





You have yet to give evidence of this.






Gill's exposition:

and Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven; body and soul; such a change passing on him, as he went through the region of the air, which divested him of his mortality and corruption, and fitted him for the invisible world.






"But refuse profane and old wive's fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness" 1 Tim. 4:7





Gill's exposition:

and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: by Abraham's bosom is meant heaven, a phrase well known to the Jews, by which they commonly expressed the happiness of the future state: of Abraham's happy state they had no doubt; and when they spake of the happiness of another's, they sometimes signified it by going to Abraham; as when the mother of the seven sons, slain by Caesar, saw her youngest going to be sacrificed {p}

"she fell upon him, and embraced him, and kissed him, and said unto him, my son, Mkyba Mhrba lua Kl, "go to Abraham, your father", and tell him, thus saith my mother, &c.''

and sometimes, as here, by being in his bosom. So it is said {q}, that Eliezer his servant (Abraham's, the same name with Lazarus)
wqyxb hnwm, "is laid in his bosom": and which may refer to the account in the Talmud {r}, that when R. Benaah, the painter of caves, came to the cave of Abraham, he found Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, hymq yaqd, "standing before him". And it is also said {s} of Rabbi, when he died, Mhrba lv wqyxb bvwy Mwyh, "this day he sits in the bosom of Abraham"; for as it was usual with them to represent the joys of heaven by a feast, so the partaking of them, by sitting down at a table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; see Mt 8:11 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Matthew/8.html#11) and as their manner at meals was by lying along on couches at eating; he that lay next another might be said to lie, or lean, in his bosom: hence Abraham's bosom came to signify the near and intimate enjoyment of happiness with him in the other world. The ascension of Christ is expressed by a being "carried up into heaven",




Gill's exposition:

Job 19:25 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/19.html#25)

Ver. 25. For I know,.... The particle w, which is sometimes rendered by the copulative "and", by an adversative "but", and sometimes as a causal particle "for", should not be rendered here by either; but as an explanative, "to wit", or "namely", as it is by Noldius {y}; in connection with the preceding words; in which Job wishes some words of his were written in a book, or engrossed on sheets of lead, or were cut out on some rock, and particularly were engraved on his tombstone; "namely", these following, "I know that my Redeemer liveth", &c. and to this agrees Broughton, "how that my Redeemer liveth"; let these be the words written, engraved, and cut out there: by my Redeemer, he means not any mere man that should rise up and vindicate him; for the account of his then living, and of his standing on the earth in the latter day, will not agree with such an one; nor God the Father, to whom the character of a Redeemer is seldom or ever given, nor did he ever appear or stand on earth, nor was his shape seen at any time, Joh 5:37 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/John/5.html#37); but the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, who is our "Goel", the word here used, our near kinsman, and so our Redeemer, to whom the right of redemption belonged; and who was spoken of by all the holy prophets, from the beginning of the world, as the Redeemer of his people, who should redeem them from all their sins; from the law, its curses and condemnation; from Satan, and his principalities and powers; from death and hell, and everlasting destruction; and that by giving himself a ransom for them; all which was known in the times of Job, Job 33:24 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/33.html#24); and known by him, who speaks of him as living; he then existed not only as a divine Person, as he did from all eternity, but in his office capacity as Mediator, and under the character of a Redeemer; for the virtue of his future redemption reached to all the ages before it, from the foundation of the world; besides, the epithet "living" points at him as the "living God", as he is, Heb 3:12 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Hebrews/3.html#12); and so equal to the work of redemption, and able to redeem, and mighty to save; of whom it is said, not that he has lived, or shall live, but "liveth"; ever lives; and so an expression of the eternity of Christ, who is from everlasting to everlasting, the same today, yesterday, and for ever; and who, though he died in human nature, yet is alive, and lives for evermore; he has life in and of himself, as he is God over all blessed for ever; and has life in him for all his people, as Mediator; and is the author of spiritual life in them, and the donor of eternal life to them; and because he lives, they shall live also. Now Job had an interest in him as the living Redeemer, and knew he had, which is the greatest blessing that can be enjoyed; an interest in Christ is of infinitely more worth than the whole world, and the knowledge of it exceeds all others; this knowledge was not merely speculative, nor only approbational and fiducial, though such Job had, Job 13:15 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/13.html#15); but the knowledge of assurance of interest; to know Christ as a Redeemer of men, and not our Redeemer, is of no avail; the devils know him to be a Redeemer, but not theirs: men may have an interest in Christ, and as yet not know it; interest is before knowledge; it is neither knowledge nor faith that gives interest, but God of his grace gives both interest and knowledge: and such a knowledge as here expressed is a peculiar favour; it is owing to an understanding given to know him that is true, and that we are in him that is true; and to the spirit of wisdom and revelation, in the knowledge of Christ, and to the testimony which he bears; and such knowledge will support under the greatest afflictions and sorest trials; under the ill usage of friends, and the loss of nearest and dearest relations, and in the views of death and eternity; all which was Job's case:

and [that] he shall stand at the latter [day] upon the earth; appear in the world in human nature; be the seed of the woman, and born of one, be made flesh, and dwell among men, and converse with them, as Jesus did; who stood upon the land of Judea, and walked through Galilee, and went about doing good to the bodies and souls of men; and this was in the last days, and at the end of the world, Heb 1:1 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Hebrews/1.html#1); as a pledge of this there were frequent appearances of the son of God in an human form to the patriarchs; nor need it seem strange that Job, though not an Israelite, had knowledge of the incarnation of Christ, when it is said to {z} be the opinion of the Indian Brahmans that God often appeared in the form and habit of some great men, and conversed among men; and that Wistnavius, whom, they say, is the second Person of the triune God, had already assumed a body nine times, and sometimes also an human one; and that the same will once more be made by him; and Confucius, the Chinese philosopher {a}, left it in writing, that the Word would be made flesh, and foresaw the year when it would be: or, "he shall rise the last out of the earth" {b}; and so it may respect his resurrection from the dead; he was brought to the dust of death, and was laid in the grave, and buried, in the earth, and was raised out of it; and whose resurrection is of the greatest moment and importance, the justification, regeneration, and resurrection of his people depending on it: but this is not to be understood as if he was the last that should rise from the dead; for he is the firstfruits of them that sleep, and the firstborn from the dead, the first that rose to an immortal life; but that he who, as to his divine nature, is the first and the last; or that, in his state of humiliation, is the last, the meanest, and most abject of men {c}; or rather, who, as the public and federal head of his people, is "the last Adam", 1Co 15:45 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/1_Corinthians/15.html#45); and who did rise as such for their justification, which makes the article of his resurrection an unspeakable benefit: or, "he shall stand over the earth in the latter day" {d} in the last times of all, in the close of time, at the end of the world, at his appearing and kingdom, when he shall come to judge the quick and dead; those that will be alive, and those that will be raised from the dead, who will meet him in the air over the earth, and shall be for ever with him; and even then "he shall stand upon the earth"; for it is expressly said, that when he shall come, and all the saints with him, "his feet shall stand on the mount of Olives", Zec 14:4 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Zechariah/14.html#4); or, "he shall stand against the earth at the latter days" {e}; in the resurrection morn, and shall exercise his authority over it, and command the earth and sea to give up their dead; and when at his all commanding voice the dead shall come out of their graves, as Lazarus came out of his, he shall stand then upon the dust of the earth, and tread upon it as a triumphant Conqueror, having subdued all his enemies, and now the last enemy, death, is destroyed by the resurrection of the dead: what a glorious and enlarged view had Job of the blessed Redeemer!

{y} ynaw "nempe ego", Nold. Ebr. Concord. Partic. p. 696. No. 1750. {z} Huet. Alnetan. Quaest. l. 2. c. 13. p. 234. {a} Martin. Sinic. Hist. l. 4. p. 131. {b} Mwqy rpe le Nwrxaw "qui postremus ex palvere (terra) surget", Nold. ib. {c} "Novissimus", i.e. "miserrimus et abjectus", Bolducius; "sic ultimus miserorum", Ciceron. Orat. pro Flacco 24. {d} "Supra pulverem", Cocceius, Schultens. {e} "Adhibebit suam vim pulveri", Tigurine version.


Job 19:26 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/19.html#26)

Ver. 26. And though after my skin [worms] destroy this ,.... Meaning not, that after his skin was wholly consumed now, which was almost gone, there being scarce any left but the skin of his teeth,
Job 19:20 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/19.html#20); the worms in his ulcers would consume what was left of his body, which scarce deserved the name of a body, and therefore he points to it, and calls it "this", without saying what it was; but that when he should be entirely stripped of his skin in the grave, then rottenness and worms would strip him also of all the rest of his flesh and his bones; by which he expresses the utter consumption of his body by death, and after it in the grave; and nevertheless, though so it would be, he was assured of his resurrection from the dead:

yet in my flesh shall I see God: he believed, that though he should die and moulder into dust in the grave, yet he should rise again, and that in true flesh, not in an aerial celestial body, but in a true body, consisting of flesh, blood, and bones, which spirits have not, and in the same flesh or body he then had, his own flesh and body, and not another's; and so with his fleshly or corporeal eyes see God, even his living Redeemer, in human nature; who, as he would stand upon the earth in that nature, in the fulness of time, and obtain redemption for him, so he would in the latter day appear again, raise him from the dead, and take him to himself, to behold his glory to all eternity: or "out of my flesh" {f}, out of my fleshly eyes; from thence and with those shall I behold God manifest in the flesh, my incarnate God; and if Job was one of those saints that rose when Christ did, as some say {g}, he saw him in the flesh and with his fleshly eyes.

{f} yrvbm "e carne mea", Tigurine version, Mercerus, Piscator, Cocceius, Schmidt, Schultens; so Gussetius, p. 446. {g} "Suidas in voce" iwb, & Sept. in ch. xlii. 17.


[B]Job 19:27 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/19.html#27)

Ver. 27. Whom I shall see for myself,.... For his pleasure and profit, to his great advantage and happiness, and to his inexpressible joy and satisfaction, see Ps 17:15 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Psalms/17.html#15);

and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; or "a stranger" {h}; these very selfsame eyes of mine I now see with will behold this glorious Person, God in my nature, and not the eyes of another, of a strange body, a body not my own; or as I have seen him with my spiritual eyes, with the eyes of faith and knowledge, as my living Redeemer, so shall I see him with my bodily eyes after the resurrection, and enjoy uninterrupted communion with him, which a stranger shall not; one that has never known anything of him, or ever intermeddled with the joy of saints here, such shall not see him hereafter, at least with pleasure; like Balaam, they may see him, but not nigh, may behold him, but afar off: though "my reins be consumed within me"; or "in my bosom";

[though]; this word may be left out, and be read,

my reins are consumed within me; or, "within my bosom" {i}; and both being the seat of the affections and desires, may signify his most earnest and eager desire after the state of the resurrection of the dead; after such a sight of God in his flesh, of the incarnate Redeemer, he believed he should have, insomuch that it ate up his spirits, as the Psalmist says, zeal for the house of God ate up his,
Ps 69:9 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Psalms/69.html#9); it was not the belief of restoration of health, and to his former outward happiness, and a deliverance from his troubles, and a desire after that, which is here expressed; for he had no faith in that, nor hope, nor expectation of it, as appears by various expressions of his; but much greater, more noble, more refined enjoyments, were experienced by him now, and still greater he expected hereafter; and his words concerning these were what he wished were written, and printed, and engraven; which, if they only respected outward happiness, he would never have desired; and though he had not his wish in his own way, yet his words are written and printed in a better book than he had in his view, and will outlast engravings with an iron pen on sheets of lead, or marble rocks. The Vulgate Latin version seems to incline to this sense,

"this here is laid up in my bosom,''

that is, of seeing God in my flesh; so the Tigurine version, rather as a paraphrase than a version, "which is my only desire".

{h} rz "alienus", Pagninus, Montanus, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Mercerus; "extraneus", Drusius. {i} yqxb "in sinu meo", Pagninus, Montanus, &c.

What does posting Gill do to the truth of scripture Ray?

Is he infallible? Gill missed this as well as John 3;13.

I will prove the letter elijah wrote, happenned 10 years after teh whirlwind. But before I do, will it do any good? I can only pray it does.

Why did you not post 14 pages from Dort as you normally do?

lionovjudah
02-10-06, 07:39 PM
Our Union with Christ stretches from eternity to eternity, though not in the same way.

How can Eph. 1:4 say that we were in Christ from eternity past, and yet 2:12 says that before conversion we were "separate from Christ"? The answer to this and imputation and justification in eternity I am convinced as Michael Hughes states on his web page are two different modes of our union with Christ: Objective union and subjective union. I can see no other way.

John

Joe, yes I did.

Union does not equal justification or imputation John. Our Justification flows from our eternal union. At the Cross.

lionovjudah
02-10-06, 07:48 PM
A question to anyone who maintains "God's elect" were "imputed with Christ's righteousness" prior to Christ's being on the tree: How do you, in light of your belief, explain 2Cor. 5:21, "hina heemeis genoometha dikaiosunee Theou en autoo", lit. "to the end that precisely we would become righteousness of God in him" ?

Any takers?


Harald

Harald. This whole section speaks of reconciliation. I will have to find my post here. But this reconciliation took place at the cross. I have asked why reconciliation would be necessary if we were already imputed/justified. And I have yet to have an answer given to that.


Paul states we were reconciled by HIS BLOOD.

I cannot believe we agree on this. Brandan, mark this down please, lest I forget

jmgipson
02-10-06, 08:03 PM
Union does not equal justification or imputation John. Our Justification flows from our eternal union. At the Cross.

Joe,
You are missing the point I am trying to make. How can scripture state in one place we are in union with Christ in Eternity, yet in another place that before conversion we were seperate from Christ? Try to view justification, imputation, sanctification, etc. the same. (Objective, Subjective)

John

ray kikkert
02-10-06, 08:09 PM
What does posting Gill do to the truth of scripture Ray?

Is he infallible? Gill missed this as well as John 3;13.

I will prove the letter elijah wrote, happenned 10 years after teh whirlwind. But before I do, will it do any good? I can only pray it does.

Why did you not post 14 pages from Dort as you normally do?

So you reject what Gill has commented here to be the truth. Then it seems you will have to come up with an explanantion of the verses posited. If Gill has it wrong, show me what is in fact truth.

Post it for me to see.

So far you are on tedious ground.

ssmstmspm
02-10-06, 08:52 PM
I would ask you all to read 1st Cor 15:6, 20, 23,51,52, and 55. Then read over 1st Peter 3:18-20, 4:6. Then consider the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. All these verses show that after death in this life a soul is escorted to HADES(Abes Bosom one side and Torment the other). Apostle Paul mentions those who have 'fallen asleep', gone to Abe's bosom are comforted. Paul, wrote of the 'fallen asleep', where are they sleeping? resting? Only at the trumpet call will the dead rise FIRST and those of us who are still alive will rise next. Everyone in his order, Christ was First, at the trump-the dead in Christ(those asleep), lastly us who are still alive.

Abraham's Bosom is the resting place of comfort of those who will be RESURRECTED and changed in a twinkling of an eye, they havent been GLORIFIED yet, they havent received a GLORIFIED BODY yet. Their souls are alive in Christ just as our souls are alive in Him if we belong to Him. The souls who are in the torment side(rich man) are just awaiting the Great White Throne Judgement. I hope this post is not interfering with your thread on justification. Maybe someone needs to start a new thread on this matter of where the soul goes after death in this life.

Washington Kid
02-10-06, 09:02 PM
HYPER-CALVINISM EXPOSED IN 2 POINTS: Point #1 regarding eternal justification: God told Jeremiah: "I have loved thee with an everlasting love" (Jer 31:3). Everlasting means eternal, so we cannot think of this "in time" because eternality is outside of time. Time has a beginning and an end; eternality just is always. God inhabits eternity (Isa 57:15). The love God is expressing to Jeremiah is eternal; Jeremiah is one of God's elect, therefore God's love to Jeremiah is eternal. Therefore, God's love to all the elect is eternal, unless you believe God is a respector of persons. God is a God of strict law and justice; so if He loves someone, they must be righteous (or justified). Therefore eternal justification is a Biblical doctrine. When we read " the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev 13:8)- we think back in time to "the beginning" (Gen 1:1) and try to go back in time from there. The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world is the fact that God eternally sees His Lamb always slain- satisfiying law and justice for the elect. God tells us: "Jesus Christ the same yesteday, and to-day, and for ever (or "for all the ages" Berry's Interlinear). So at anytime: yesterday or today if went to Israel would we see Jesus Christ? No. Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today, and for ever is God telling us that He has always seen all that Christ has done for the elect eternally. And because of this the elect are always eternally justified in the mind of God. When we are regenerated, we received the mind of Christ; having thus received may the elect see the mind of God revealing to us His eternal justification of us! The only other alternative is to say that God in eternity is mutable........................................... ........Point #2: THE TIMING OF IMPUTATION: since we are speaking of timing we are now back "in time" where we dwell. Imputation of Christ's righteousness is actually eternal in the mind of God as His judical declaration is that all His elect are righteous. God in His Word reveals when (when is only for humans for we are finite) imputation takes place....at the cross. God tells us " God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them" (II Cor 5:19). The only way a sinner can be reconciled to God is if he is righteous (or justified). The only way a sinner can be righteous (or justified) is to have Christ's righteousness imputed to them. Christ righteousness imputed + nothing is the only ground of salvation for the elect. God tells us in the afore mentioned passage (II Cor 5:19) that He did not impute their trespasses unto them (the world of the elect). If He did not impute their trespasses unto them, then for God to be a Just God and a Saviour (Isa 45:21), then He must have imputed Christ's righteousness to them. God either imputes sin to a sinner or righteousness: perfect righteousness being perfect satisfaction to God's law and justice in the person of Christ for the elect. How do we know that Christ's righteousness is imputed to the sinner at the cross? Because God is pleased to tell us so. God tells us: "being now justified by his blood" (Rom 5:9). On the cross Christ satisfied God's law and justice, and the only way we could be justified by his blood is if His righteousness was imputed to us then. Without Christ's righteousness imputed can one be justified (or righteous)? No. When were we justified? At the cross "justified by his blood". In the next verse God tells us "we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son" (Rom 5:10). To be reconciled means that we are justified (or righteous). The only way a sinner can be righteous (or justified) is to have Christ's righteousness imputed to them. When was Christ's righteousness imputed to us? God clearly states "by the death of his Son". At the cross, Christ's righteosness was imputed to us; we see this in time (at the cross) while God has always seen Christ's righteousness imputed to us (see point #1). The only alternative is to say that we are reconciled to God by the death of His Son in some other way than imputed righteousness............Kentucky Kid

Brandan
02-10-06, 11:00 PM
Thank you Bro. Craig for outlining this doctrine so clearly. You nailed it! I'm so glad to have met you and I look forward to even more correspondence with you in the years ahead, Deo Valente of course.

lionovjudah
02-11-06, 07:15 AM
So you reject what Gill has commented here to be the truth. Then it seems you will have to come up with an explanantion of the verses posited. If Gill has it wrong, show me what is in fact truth.

Post it for me to see.

So far you are on tedious ground.


Yes I do reject it. I will later show you Ray, that Elijah letter recorded came 10 years after he was taken up in the whirlwind. Right now I am remodeling our hallway. Be patient with me RK.


JPK

melted
02-11-06, 10:55 AM
Please answer this question:

Are you justified in eternity?

If the answer is yes, then there is eternal justification. Eternity is not bound by time; it surrounds and engulfs time. Why is this so difficult to understand?

If the answer is no, then you are condemned in eternity and will perish.

It seems such a simple concept. It's one or the other. To take justification out of eternity is to take it out of the eternal mind of God and replace it with condemnation.

ray kikkert
02-11-06, 12:08 PM
I would ask you all to read 1st Cor 15:6, 20, 23,51,52, and 55. Then read over 1st Peter 3:18-20, 4:6. Then consider the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. All these verses show that after death in this life a soul is escorted to HADES(Abes Bosom one side and Torment the other). Apostle Paul mentions those who have 'fallen asleep', gone to Abe's bosom are comforted. Paul, wrote of the 'fallen asleep', where are they sleeping? resting?

No , the soul is active. Moses and Elijah were present with Christ at the mount of transfiquration. The intermediate state does not negate the fact that the soul if elect is in heaven, if reprobate in hell. The body of both vessels are in the grave. In the final state of glorification both the body and soul will be joined together. This does not mean then that the soul is sleeping. No. The elect soul is with the Lord in heaven. The reprobate soul is without in the torment of hell. The "fallen asleep" refers to the body, NOT the soul.

What did Christ say to the theif on the cross? Today your body will go to the grave and your soul is going to have a comfy sleep. No. The Lord said "Today thou shalt be with me in paradise" Why did the apostle state that to live is for Christ and to die is gain?? 1 Philipians 1:20-23 The apostle is not wrestling with himself. He discusses not only the intermediate state, but also the glorious final state in the ressurrection.
Herman Hoeksema rightly outlined the abominations of certain thinking:

"
Philosophical Answers to the Problem

Universalism
All kinds of different answers--mostly philosophical--have been given concerning that problem. I will mention a few of them. There are the views of "universalism." Universalism is of two kinds: hypothetical universalism and absolute universalism.
Hypothetical universalism means that the soul after death will have a second chance. Having experienced death, the pains and sorrow and suffering of death, that soul will be induced to convert itself and come to Christ. That was the idea of the late English preacher Campbell Morgan. I will never forget the day I was at school and he lectured, or rather preached, on the text the end of which is, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me" (John 12:32). Campbell Morgan had the habit of preaching exactly one hour. He would be on the platform for one hour, and when the hour was finished, he simply quit. This text was the end of the passage on which he spoke, and I was waiting for him to explain the verse. Finally, about five minutes to twelve--he spoke from eleven to twelve--he said this: "Now I don't care what you believe, whether you are Lutheran or Calvinist or Arminian. That is not my concern. I'll simply tell you exactly what the text means." Then he said that the text means this, that, son somehow or other, all men that have ever lived in the world or that shall still live in the world will have a chance to come to Christ. That is hypothetical universalism. After death, the soul shall have another chance to be saved. and if that chance is neglected, that soul will then go to hell.
Strict absolute universalism means that everybody will finally be saved. According to this view, God is the Father of all men. All men, simply by virtue of the fact that they are men, are the children of God. In one way or another all men will in the end be saved. Only the most liberal in the history of the church have held to this position.
Roman Catholic View
According to the Roman Catholic view, hades or sheol is divided into compartments. One is the limbus infantum, that is. the abode of infants. Another is the limbus patrum, the abode of the fathers of the Old Testament. Another is purgatory. I am not interested now in the limbus infantum, which means that there is a separate compartment in hades for the infants who have died before baptism. They do not go to heaven or to hell, but somewhere in between. Rome's view of purgatory is premised on the view that really no one can go to heaven immediately alter death unless he is perfectly holy, perfectly righteous, perfectly clean before he dies. Purgatory, really, is for all the faithful, no matter how good, except those who are officially canonized by the Pope or those who have done a sufficient number of good works to have earned the right to enter into heaven immediately. Purgatory, therefore, is an intermediate state between death and heaven. After death there must still be a sort of intermission, a sort of transition, a state in which the soul becomes pure and prepared to go to heaven. That is the Roman Catholic idea.
That, of course, is pure speculation. There is no basis whatever for anything like that in Scripture, and if anything condemns that idea of purgatory, it is certainly the word of Jesus to the penitent thief: "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). Today! If anyone should have gone to purgatory, it was certainly the thief on the cross. He had no good works. He was not pure and clean so as to be fit for heaven--not before he died. Yet the Lord said to him, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise."
Theory of Soul-Sleep
Another theory that is rather prevalent is "soul-sleep." It is the theory that between physical death and the resurrection the soul lapses into a state of sleep, of unconsciousness. It is rather striking that a man in my own congregation once believed that. I think he was a child of God, but shortly before he died he called me and, instead of taking hold of the comfort of the house of many mansions and of the house of God, he wanted to argue with me about soul-sleep. He was dying: in fact, he did not live more than two hours after that. I told him, "Brother, one thing I'll tell you: it won't be long before you will find out that you are mistaken. That's all. I don't want to argue with you about it; within a few hours you'll find out surely that you're wrong."
There are still people in the Reformed churches who cling to the idea of soul-sleep. They believe that after death the soul falls asleep and enters into a state of unconsciousness. They claim to have proof--scriptural proof. For proof they call attention to the fact that the Bible, both in the Old and New Testaments, calls death a "sleep." Moreover, they point to certain saints who died and were called back to the present life, and they argue that the souls of those people were asleep in the state of death. Lazarus was sleeping, the Lord says, and the Lord was going to wake him up (John 11:11). The daughter of Jairus too is said to have been sleeping (Luke 8:52). All of these passages, and especially the Scriptures that speak of death as a sleep, those who believe in soul-sleep quote as proof for their position.
Now. in the first place, I maintain that the soul cannot sleep. The body sleeps. But the soul is always wide awake. In fact, I find that my soul is often so wide awake that I solve all kinds of problems while my body sleeps. I have sometimes made entire sermons in my sleep. I have made a theme and divisions for a sermon in my sleep, and when I awakened, I found that the correct theme and divisions are exactly what I had worked out while sleeping. When I was in school, I sometimes struggled with a very difficult mathematical problem in trigonometry or calculus late into the night, and when I finally fell asleep I solved the problem in my sleep. I assure you that the soul never sleeps The fact that we dream is proof that the soul does not sleep.
The body, however, does sleep. Sleep is physical. A study of those passages in which Scripture speaks of death as a sleep will reveal that in every instance the reference is to the body. Oh. yes, death is a sleep as far as the body is concerned. The body is laid asleep in the grave with a view to the resurrection, whether for the wicked or the righteous. The body shall be awakened at the time of the resurrection. In that sense death is a sleep. Physical death is the temporary sleep of the body in the grave until the Lord wakes up the body. But the soul does not sleep.
As far as Lazarus and the daughter of Jairus are concerned, there is no support for soul-sleep in those passages of Scripture at all. I think that there was a special provision made for Lazarus, for the daughter of Jairus, for the young man of Nain, and for others who were called back to this present life. A special provision was made, so that we can say of Lazarus that he slept, and of the daughter of Jairus that she slept. And of all those whom the Lord called back to this present life it can be said that they slept. It is in fact impossible to think that Lazarus first went to heaven and then was called back to this wicked world into the body of this death; or that the young man of Nain was called back from glory into the present state of corruption; and likewise the daughter of Jairus. Oh, no! I think, indeed, that in those cases their souls remained unconscious until the Lord called them back into the present life. But no support can be found in these miraculous resurrections for a common sleep of the soul after death."

....you can read his full outline here:

http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_81.html




Only at the trumpet call will the dead rise FIRST and those of us who are still alive will rise next. Everyone in his order, Christ was First, at the trump-the dead in Christ(those asleep), lastly us who are still alive.

Abraham's Bosom is the resting place of comfort of those who will be RESURRECTED and changed in a twinkling of an eye, they havent been GLORIFIED yet, they havent received a GLORIFIED BODY yet. Their souls are alive in Christ just as our souls are alive in Him if we belong to Him. The souls who are in the torment side(rich man) are just awaiting the Great White Throne Judgement. I hope this post is not interfering with your thread on justification. Maybe someone needs to start a new thread on this matter of where the soul goes after death in this life.

I have no problem with the glorious resurrection and the reuniting of the body and soul together.

I have a problem with those who think that old testament saints souls are having a nap. The idea is senseless. Just think of it. When I die physically my soul according to these philosophers will have a nap. No big deal since Abraham has been napping for quite a while. Nighty night:(

Saint Nicholas
02-11-06, 12:13 PM
I could be Nick. That is always a possibility.

Nick, you and others are making it sound like I am saying they are dead. That there spirits are dead. I never spoke as such. This is not the question at hand.

Noone has ascended to heaven except Christ. He said it

and Luke says the same thing in Acts.
Acts 26:23 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/acts/26.html#23) That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead.


Ephesians 4 also states.
8 This is why it says: "When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men."
9 (What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions ?
10 He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.


Matthew 27:50 - 52 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=English&version=KJV&interface=print&search=&passage=Matthew+27) (English-KJV):
50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

John 5:28-29 (English-NIV) (http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=English&version=NIV&interface=print&passage=John+5:28-29&search=&showxref=&showfn=)
28 "Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice
29 and come out--those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned.

Christ conquered death at the cross. Here all the OT saints who lookfoward with the eyes of faith on His sacrafice we united with Him.

We are digressing here.

Lionovjudah.....Let's talk a little about Abraham's Bosom. There are only FOUR teachings that I am aware of through Church history, that a soul can reside. Now let me make myself absolutely clear here. I am not talking about our BODIES. I am only referring to our SOUL AND SPIRIT ESSENCE.

(1) HEAVEN- The inhabitance of GOD and Regenerate souls. The elect.
(2) Hell - The inhabitance of DEVILS and REPROBATE Souls of men.
(3) LIMBO - A heretical Roman Catholic teaching. " From the Latin word meaning a border or hem. It is a place adjoining or bordering hell where the just who died in the grace of God before Christianity remained until they were liberated by Christ, and where the unbaptized dwell and remain forever if they have no personal sins on their soul. According to the teaching of Thomas Aquinas babies who die without baptism will be deprived of the Beatific Vision since without grace they cannot have the vision of God which is a supernatural good of which they have no knowledge."
(4).PURGATORY- A heretical Roman Catholic teaching. " The place and state in which souls suffer for a time after death and are cleansed of their sins, before entering into Heaven."

Now let's think for a moment. Was Abraham's Bosom a TYPE, PICTURE, and METAPHOR of HEAVEN (I think so)? or are you going to side with ROME. Before you respond think for a while before you expose yourself.

Nicholas

doctr_of_grace
02-11-06, 05:10 PM
HYPER-CALVINISM EXPOSED IN 2 POINTS:
thanks i really liked what you posted and the two points you brought together.

Ray ... thanks for what you have contributed and I am not sure if Joe is being a devils advocate for argument sake or what? He confuses me at times. The article he posted was an interesting read but I don't agree with the author. I am not a literary reviewer so won't bore anyone with my personal opinions.

Hurry and get your hallway done so you can prove your point :D @ Joe. Joe you state in your profile that God never hated the elect ... your idea on eternal justification and this answer seem to contradict one another. Please explain how God can love one that he sees as sinful?

Out for now ... Jan

ssmstmspm
02-11-06, 05:25 PM
There must be some confusion, because I never said that the soul is asleep. On the contrary, I posted that the soul was 'resting', 'fallen asleep', being 'comforted'. The proof that souls are 'resting' is found in Rev 6:9-11. The writer of Rev wrote "they should rest a little while longer". Also notice that the 'souls' were UNDER the altar, and not 'around' the altar. If these souls were in the PRESENCE of the Lamb, they would be 'around' the altar serving and worshipping the Lamb. Just because the souls are in Abraham's Bosom doesnt mean they are not in contact with the Lamb. Look at Rev 6:10.:)

ray kikkert
02-11-06, 06:45 PM
There must be some confusion, because I never said that the soul is asleep. On the contrary, I posted that the soul was 'resting', 'fallen asleep', being 'comforted'. The proof that souls are 'resting' is found in Rev 6:9-11. The writer of Rev wrote "they should rest a little while longer". Also notice that the 'souls' were UNDER the altar, and not 'around' the altar. If these souls were in the PRESENCE of the Lamb, they would be 'around' the altar serving and worshipping the Lamb. Just because the souls are in Abraham's Bosom doesnt mean they are not in contact with the Lamb. Look at Rev 6:10.:)

So since according to you they are not in contact with Christ, who then is giving them robes of righteousness and rest for a season???? Some public relations angel???

I find the idea that they are not in contact with Christ unsubstantiated and out to lunch. They are indeed in contact with Christ and these souls have fellowship with the Lord.

So you admit that these souls like Stephen are not sleeping , but resting. What do you think "rest" means here? What is your difference between "sleeping" and "fallen asleep" ??

John Gill's exposition:

Revelation 6:9 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Revelation/6.html#9)

Ver. 9. And when he had opened the fifth seal,.... Of the seven seals of the sealed book; here is no beast speaking here, nor horse and rider presented to view; it was now a very dark time both with respect to the church of God and ministry of the word, and the Roman empire. This seal refers to the times of Dioclesian, and the persecution under him; and instead of the voice of one of the living creatures, John hears the voice of martyrs:

I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain; these include not only all the martyrs that were put to death in the persecution of Dioclesian, but all those that suffered in all the persecutions preceding; for this, being the last, involves them all. "Souls", being immaterial and incorporeal, are invisible to the bodily eye; these therefore were either clothed with corporeal forms, as angels sometimes are, or rather John saw them in a visionary way, as he saw the angels: and these were the souls of such as "were slain"; their bodies were dead, but their souls were alive; which shows the immortality of souls, and that they die not with their bodies, and that they live after them in a separate state: ylwjqd Nytmvn, "the souls of them that are slain", is a phrase used by Jewish writers {a}, and who have a notion that the souls of those that are slain are kept in certain palaces, under the care of one appointed by God {b}: and these were seen "under the altar"; either this is said in allusion to the blood of the sacrifices, which was poured out at the bottom of the altar, Le 4:7 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Leviticus/4.html#7), in which the life and soul of the creature is; or because that martyrdom is a sacrifice of men's lives, and an offering of them in the cause of God and truth, Php 2:17 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Philippians/2.html#17); or with some reference to a common notion of the Jews, that the souls of the righteous are treasured up under the throne of glory {c} they have also a saying, everyone that is buried in the land of Israel is as if he was buried "under the altar" {d}; for they think that being buried there expiates their sins {e}; to which they add, that whoever is buried "under the altar", is as if he was buried under the throne of glory {f}; yea, they talk of an altar above, upon which Michael the high priest causes the souls of the righteous to ascend {g}. Christ may be meant by the altar here, as he is in Heb 13:10 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Hebrews/13.html#10), who is both altar, sacrifice, and priest, and is the altar that sanctifies the gift, and from off which every sacrifice of prayer and praise comes up with acceptance before God; and the souls of the martyrs being under this altar, denotes their being in the presence of Christ, and enjoying communion with him, and being in his hands, into whose hands they commit their souls at death, as Stephen did, and being under his care and protection until the resurrection morn, when they shall be reunited to their bodies which sleep in Jesus: and they were slain

for the word of God; both for the essential Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, whose faith they professed; and for the written word, they made the rule of their faith and practice, and which Dioclesian forbid the reading of, and sought utterly to destroy; and for the Gospel principally, which is contained in it:

and for the testimony which they held; the Syriac and Arabic versions read, "for the testimony of the Lamb"; and so the Complutensian edition; either for the Gospel, which is a testimony of the person, office, and grace of Christ, the Lamb, which they embraced, professed, and held fast; or for the witness they bore to him, and the profession which they made thereof, and in which they continued.

{a} Tosaphta in Zohar in Exod. fol. 79. 4. {b} Shaare Ora, fol. 31. 2. {c} T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. 152. 2. Zohar in Numb. fol. 39. 4. Abot R. Nathan, c. 12. Raziel, fol. 39. 1. Caphtor, fol. 15. 2. & 112. 2. Nismat Chayim, fol. 16. 2. {d} T. Bab. Cetubot, fol. 111. 1. {e} Maimon. Hilchot. Melacim, c. 5. sect. 11. {f} Abot R. Nathan, c. 26. {g} Tzeror Hammor, fol. 85. 3.


Revelation 6:10 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Revelation/6.html#10)

Ver. 10. And they cried with a loud voice,.... With great ardour and fervency, being very pressing and importunate; and which shows that they were awake, and not asleep, and that the soul does not sleep with the body in the grave, or is after the death of that in a state of insensibility and inactivity, as some imagine:

saying, how long, O Lord, holy and true; the person they address is either the Lamb in the midst of the throne, with whom they were, and under the shelter of whom they were safe and happy; or God the Father, who sat upon the throne, whom they call "holy", because being so in his nature, and as appears in all his works, he could not but hate, and so revenge the evil that was done to them by their cruel persecutors; and whereas he is "true" to all his threatenings, as well as his promises, and faithful to every word of his, they doubted not but he would judge and avenge them of their enemies; but they seem desirous to know how long it would be first: saying,

dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? the men of the world, idolatrous persons, earthly princes, who had shed their blood; and which they desire not out of any sinful or malicious affection, but that the holiness and justice of God might appear, and also his truth and faithfulness in his promises to them, and threatenings to his enemies; and that God in all things might be glorified, and his church and people on earth might be supported and delivered; see Job 24:12 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Job/24.html#12).


Revelation 6:11 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Revelation/6.html#11)

Ver. 11. And white robes were given to everyone of them,.... The Alexandrian copy, and some others, read in the singular number, "a white robe", and so does the Syriac version; as a token of their innocence, that they did not suffer, or were slain, for any capital crime or immorality they were guilty of; and of their purity and perfection they now enjoyed; as also of that spiritual delight and pleasure, which was unspeakable and full of glory, they now had in the presence of God and Christ; and in short, of that happiness and glory which souls in a separate state, before the resurrection morn, are partakers of; who besides the righteousness of Christ, comparable to fine linen clean and white, walk with Christ in white, in the shining robes of bliss and glory:

and it was said unto them, that they should rest; or have rest; eternal rest from all their toil and labour, from all their sorrows and sufferings of every kind, which rest remains for the people of God, and into which these were now entered; or that they should cease from expostulating and inquiring after the above manner, and rest satisfied and contented, exercising the graces of faith, hope, and patience, believing, looking, and waiting:

yet for a little season; either until the end of this persecution by Dioclesian, when vengeance would be taken of the Roman empire, and it would be no more as Pagan; or until the day of judgment, when full vengeance will be inflicted on the persecutors of the saints; and which is but a little while with God, with whom a thousand years is as one day, and in comparison of that eternity of blessedness glorified saints are partakers of:

until their fellow servants also, and their brethren, that should be killed as they [were], should be fulfilled; meaning either the rest of the saints that should suffer martyrdom in the: following part of this persecution; or those who should suffer under the Arian persecution, when the empire would become Christian; or under Rome Papal, and in all the persecutions of the apostasy, unto the end of that state: these are called "fellow servants" and "brethren" of the saints in heaven; for they all worship and serve the same God, and belong to the same family, in heaven and in earth; and the selfsame reason that is made use of to animate the saints below to courage, faith, and patience in suffering, 1Pe 5:9 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/1_Peter/5.html#9), is used to keep up the expectation of the saints in heaven, of that vengeance that will be executed on their enemies, and to point out the time when it will be; and it may be observed, that the number of martyrs, or of those that shall suffer and die in the cause of Christ, and for his Gospel, is fixed and determined by God; and that number shall be perfected and completed, and when that is done, he will pour out all his wrath on them that have persecuted them and put them to death: and so the Arabic version renders it, "that the number of their companions and brethren, and of those who are to be killed as they have been killed, is fulfilled"; In the Apocrypha is written:

"39 Which are departed from the shadow of the world, and have received glorious garments of the Lord. 40 Take thy number, O Sion, and shut up those of thine that are clothed in white, which have fulfilled the law of the Lord. 41 The number of thy children, whom thou longedst for, is fulfilled: beseech the power of the Lord, that thy people, which have been called from the beginning, may be hallowed.'' (2 Esdras 2)

Now though this seal does not introduce any judgment to be executed on the Roman empire, as the others do; yet since it introduces all the martyrs with one united voice requiring vengeance on their blood, it may very well be considered as a step towards, and as making way for, the utter ruin of that empire: and which the next seal being opened brings on, and is a full answer to the cry of these souls.

ssmstmspm
02-11-06, 09:30 PM
So since according to you they are not in contact with Christ, who then is giving them robes of righteousness and rest for a season???? Some public relations angel???

I find the idea that they are not in contact with Christ unsubstantiated and out to lunch. They are indeed in contact with Christ and these souls have fellowship with the Lord.

So you admit that these souls like Stephen are not sleeping , but resting. What do you think "rest" means here? What is your difference between "sleeping" and "fallen asleep" ??


How do you get that I say there are NOT in contact with the Lord? You need to read over again my last Sentence in my last post. The sentence states that the souls ARE in contact with the Lamb. That is why I referenced Rev 6:10.:confused:

lionovjudah
02-12-06, 07:43 AM
Ray ... thanks for what you have contributed and I am not sure if Joe is being a devils advocate for argument sake or what? He confuses me at times. The article he posted was an interesting read but I don't agree with the author. I am not a literary reviewer so won't bore anyone with my personal opinions.

Hurry and get your hallway done so you can prove your point :D @ Joe. Joe you state in your profile that God never hated the elect ... your idea on eternal justification and this answer seem to contradict one another. Please explain how God can love one that he sees as sinful?

Out for now ... Jan


It will be worth the wait Janny!!!!!!!!! I asked my wife if I could stop working so I can go on 5 solas and post my thoughts. It did not fly too well. So for the sake of a peaceful home, it was easy for me to figure out what I should choose.

BUt:

1) I am not being argumentative for the kicks
2) Samuel Trott did an excellent job.
3) Scripture says He loved us while we were yet sinners right? And I stay right there, with no BUTS. He died for the ungodly right?


More later today. Church, hallway, running, tree cutting, then 5 solas.


JPK

jmgipson
02-12-06, 10:35 AM
Reformed Dogmatics….

No one who is Reformed can deny justification before faith. That is from eternity in the decree of God. Upon what other grounds has the Father given the elect to the Son, but upon the ground that the Lamb was slain before the foundation of the world for the perfect satisfaction of the violated justice of God? Christ gave Himself as Surety for the debt of those predestinated to salvation and the Father has accepted this suretyship as a propitiation for their sins. Thus in eternity, in the establishment of the Covenant of Redemption, God’s justice was satisfied, and the acquittal pronounced. The Apostle says this clearly in 2 Cor. 5:19, “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself.” (2 Tim. 1:9)

Indeed, in Christ the elect are given grace from eternity, and consequently, they are saved and called in time. “Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.

The elect were ordained and justified from eternity. On this basis those who lived under the Old Covenant were saved by faith and were taken up to heaven. They needed not to be sent to a purgatory imagined by Rome. (Rom 8:29-30) “29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.”

We may not distort this text as if it said that God had decreed to justify by faith in time those whom He had predestinated. It is undeniable that Paul in these words is speaking of the benefits that the Father had given to His own in Christ from eternity. Surely, he did not write, “They shall be glorified,” but, “Them He also glorified.” Although the full glorification of the Church of God awaits the last day, yet it is already glorified in its head Christ, and this has taken place before. From eternity the Church is chosen in Christ (Eph, 1:4); in eternity it is also justified, namely in Christ, and in Him it is also called and glorified. Therefore there no longer remains any charge against God’s elect (Rom. 8:33). While in this life many charges can be brought against the regenerated, every charge is rejected before the bar of heaven. Therefore when Satan stood at the right hand of Joshua the high priest to resist him who stood before the angel of the LORD in filthy garments, he was answered, “The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that had chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee.” God’s eternal decree justified Joshua, and in Him the entire church. In God’s decree the elect are justified from eternity.

In this lies the firm ground of justification by faith. Although their conscience often accuses, although their faith often wavers, the acquittal of God’s people can never be broken. It lies unshakably firm in the decree and in the covenant of God from before the foundation of the world. Yet the subjective justification in time by faith is necessary, and it is an infallible result of the justification in eternity.

Reformed Dogmatics (Volume 2) by Rev. G.H. Kersten

All this has been said throughout this thread but I wanted this in the thread because I am keeping all this in a notebook.:D

John Gipson

lionovjudah
02-12-06, 01:41 PM
So you reject what Gill has commented here to be the truth. Then it seems you will have to come up with an explanantion of the verses posited. If Gill has it wrong, show me what is in fact truth.

Post it for me to see.

So far you are on tedious ground.


Ok Ray: Here it goes. Where did Elijah go?

First and foremost, The account of Elijah writing a letter to Jehorom recorded in 2 Chronicles 21:12-15 shows the Elijah was transported "Some where else" in the whirlwind. Scriptures speak of 3 heavens. 1) The Heaven of Gods throne( 2 Corinthians 12:2, 2) Genesis 22:17 "I will multiply your seed as the stars of the heaven . . . " This is outer space per se, where the stars and planets are, 3) Jeremiah 4:25 " . . . and all the birds of the heavens were fled." This is our atmosphere. This is where Elijah was seen traveling. And obviously somewhere else on the earth. Exactly like the account of Steven in Acts. The SPirit took him to some other place.


shamahym is the word used in 2 Kings. #8064 in concordance. shameh is the root, which means sky. Not where God's throne is.

And again look at John 3:13 " And no man has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of man who is in heaven. "

And Acts 2;34 " For David did not ascend into the heavens but he said himself: 'The Lord said to My Lord, 'Sit at My right hand, till I make your enemies Your footstool.' "

Why would Peter say this inspired word? David is not in Heaven with Christ at the throne of God yet When he died.

BAck to the letter.

ELijah was taken away, you say to heaveb to be with Christ. But this leter predicted the death of Jehoram. Now how could this be. If you timeline the events, it was 8-10 years after being whisked away when Jehoram became king. And the wording shows that these events happenned already. He writes the letter for events that had passed.


12: And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the LORD God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah,
13: But hast walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and hast made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to go a whoring, like to the whoredoms of the house of Ahab, and also hast slain thy brethren of thy father's house, which were better than thyself:
14: Behold, with a great plague will the LORD smite thy people, and thy children, and thy wives, and all thy goods:
15: And thou shalt have great sickness by disease of thy bowels, until thy bowels fall out by reason of the sickness day by day.

All these events took place except his death. Which happenned 2 years later. Therefore we can conclude Elijah was still living somewhere.


Look at Hebrews 11. The promise is resurrection to life. IT specifically syas they did not receive it. Until Christ Ascended and led them home.
11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.
1 Corinthians 15:20, "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept."


"the firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18)

So you see Ray, Gill is wrong here. These did not rise to the throne of God. Until Christ himself raised. They were in Shoel, waiting for the promise to be completed.


Do you need anything else Ray?

ray kikkert
02-12-06, 02:27 PM
How do you get that I say there are NOT in contact with the Lord? You need to read over again my last Sentence in my last post. The sentence states that the souls ARE in contact with the Lamb. That is why I referenced Rev 6:10.:confused:

I apologize.:(

I am glad you think that the souls of those old testament saints are indeed not only in contact with our Lord , but also in fellowship with Him in the intermediate state.

I found confusing that you would reject the soul sleeping, but advocate the soul has "fallen asleep". I see the 2 as the same thing. I maintain that the soul is active , is in heaven with the Lord, is in fellowship with Him during the intermediate state, and is awaiting the return of Christ , when our souls will be joined with our glorified bodies in the resurrection.

ray kikkert
02-12-06, 02:34 PM
Ok Ray: Here it goes. Where did Elijah go?

First and foremost, The account of Elijah writing a letter to Jehorom recorded in 2 Chronicles 21:12-15 shows the Elijah was transported "Some where else" in the whirlwind. Scriptures speak of 3 heavens. 1) The Heaven of Gods throne( 2 Corinthians 12:2, 2) Genesis 22:17 "I will multiply your seed as the stars of the heaven . . . " This is outer space per se, where the stars and planets are, 3) Jeremiah 4:25 " . . . and all the birds of the heavens were fled." This is our atmosphere. This is where Elijah was seen traveling. And obviously somewhere else on the earth. Exactly like the account of Steven in Acts. The SPirit took him to some other place.


shamahym is the word used in 2 Kings. #8064 in concordance. shameh is the root, which means sky. Not where God's throne is.

And again look at John 3:13 " And no man has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of man who is in heaven. "

And Acts 2;34 " For David did not ascend into the heavens but he said himself: 'The Lord said to My Lord, 'Sit at My right hand, till I make your enemies Your footstool.' "

Why would Peter say this inspired word? David is not in Heaven with Christ at the throne of God yet When he died.

BAck to the letter.

ELijah was taken away, you say to heaveb to be with Christ. But this leter predicted the death of Jehoram. Now how could this be. If you timeline the events, it was 8-10 years after being whisked away when Jehoram became king. And the wording shows that these events happenned already. He writes the letter for events that had passed.


12: And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the LORD God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah,
13: But hast walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and hast made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to go a whoring, like to the whoredoms of the house of Ahab, and also hast slain thy brethren of thy father's house, which were better than thyself:
14: Behold, with a great plague will the LORD smite thy people, and thy children, and thy wives, and all thy goods:
15: And thou shalt have great sickness by disease of thy bowels, until thy bowels fall out by reason of the sickness day by day.

All these events took place except his death. Which happenned 2 years later. Therefore we can conclude Elijah was still living somewhere.


Look at Hebrews 11. The promise is resurrection to life. IT specifically syas they did not receive it. Until Christ Ascended and led them home.
11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.
1 Corinthians 15:20, "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept."


"the firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18)

So you see Ray, Gill is wrong here. These did not rise to the throne of God. Until Christ himself raised. They were in Shoel, waiting for the promise to be completed.


Do you need anything else Ray?

No , not for right now.

I initially laughed though and thought, according to your scheme Elijah to be infact "ET".

Regardless, I will bounce this off of my minster, have a boo through some commentaries, check out your Scripture references, and see how your scheme lines up against Scripture.

In the meantime though, I would really like to see others takes on what Joe has posited here.

jmgipson
02-12-06, 04:12 PM
Ok Ray: Here it goes. Where did Elijah go?

First and foremost, The account of Elijah writing a letter to Jehorom recorded in 2 Chronicles 21:12-15 shows the Elijah was transported "Some where else" in the whirlwind. Scriptures speak of 3 heavens. 1) The Heaven of Gods throne( 2 Corinthians 12:2, 2) Genesis 22:17 "I will multiply your seed as the stars of the heaven . . . " This is outer space per se, where the stars and planets are, 3) Jeremiah 4:25 " . . . and all the birds of the heavens were fled." This is our atmosphere. This is where Elijah was seen traveling. And obviously somewhere else on the earth. Exactly like the account of Steven in Acts. The SPirit took him to some other place.


shamahym is the word used in 2 Kings. #8064 in concordance. shameh is the root, which means sky. Not where God's throne is.

And again look at John 3:13 " And no man has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of man who is in heaven. "

And Acts 2;34 " For David did not ascend into the heavens but he said himself: 'The Lord said to My Lord, 'Sit at My right hand, till I make your enemies Your footstool.' "

Why would Peter say this inspired word? David is not in Heaven with Christ at the throne of God yet When he died.

BAck to the letter.

ELijah was taken away, you say to heaveb to be with Christ. But this leter predicted the death of Jehoram. Now how could this be. If you timeline the events, it was 8-10 years after being whisked away when Jehoram became king. And the wording shows that these events happenned already. He writes the letter for events that had passed.


12: And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the LORD God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah,
13: But hast walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and hast made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to go a whoring, like to the whoredoms of the house of Ahab, and also hast slain thy brethren of thy father's house, which were better than thyself:
14: Behold, with a great plague will the LORD smite thy people, and thy children, and thy wives, and all thy goods:
15: And thou shalt have great sickness by disease of thy bowels, until thy bowels fall out by reason of the sickness day by day.

All these events took place except his death. Which happenned 2 years later. Therefore we can conclude Elijah was still living somewhere.


Look at Hebrews 11. The promise is resurrection to life. IT specifically syas they did not receive it. Until Christ Ascended and led them home.
11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.
1 Corinthians 15:20, "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept."


"the firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18)

So you see Ray, Gill is wrong here. These did not rise to the throne of God. Until Christ himself raised. They were in Shoel, waiting for the promise to be completed.


Do you need anything else Ray?

I think I am missing the connection. What has this to do with justification and imputation from eternity?

Washington Kid
02-12-06, 08:22 PM
IMPUTATION AT THE CROSS: God tells us in Romans 4:25 " Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification". Literally it can read Who was delivered because our offences, and was raised again because our justification. Sin demands death. Righteousness demands life. The grave could not hold Christ because He established a perfect righteousness for the elect at the cross. Righteousness demands life. Christ was resurrected from the grave BECAUSE OUR JUSTIFICATION: in other words, when Christ was resurrected our justification had already taken place- at the cross. And the only way one can be justified is by righteousness imputed. So, when speaking "in time", Christ's righteousness was imputed to us at the cross: "raised again for our justification".......Kentucky Kid

Bob Higby
02-13-06, 02:01 AM
Answers to Joe:
One thing I find missing is any scriptural backup to justify eternal justification. Not logical conclusions, we can all do that. But solid biblical inspired words that explicitly or implicitly that speak of justification in eternity past, I cannot find. I see throughout the writ explicit teachings that speak completely against this thought.

Not once is the promise spoken of as completed or in the past.

How can Christs acive/passive obedience,His righteousness be imputed to His elect prior to any sin in them?

The decree to impute was a decree to impute at the cross. And as the OT saints looked forward with the eye of faith, we look backwards.

There is not one recorded word stating that the redeemed look back to before creation, look back to our election in Christ as our rep, for our being declared justified or imputed before God.

I have never said they do, one flows from the other. But the decree to justify, or impute, does not equal the justification because this is not all of the decree.

Outrageous! Have you read Rom. 8:29-30? I’m sure that you have--but the truth of the passage is 100% at odds with what you are saying here. God did not only justify his elect from eternity, he GLORIFIED his elect from eternity! Yes, our future glorification in the New Earth (yet to be realized in history) was sure, certain, and settled transcendent of all time and space! The glorification of Christ’s saints is a future event in linear history yet already accomplished in God’s glorious plan as if it is PAST history! The same with justification. So those who deny eternal justification are AGAINST scripture as sure and certain as Pelagians, Semi-Pelagians, Arminians, Wesleyans, Amyraldians, Augustinians, infralapsarians, and any other ‘ism’ that would deny God’s full sovereignty

No one understands what Gods view of Christ in eternity means anyway. Lets face it. It is only mystical and good table talk. We are not eternal beings brandan. We are created. In Time. And this is the revelation of the Word.

Garbage and paradox theology at its worst! If we accept this gobbledygook, we might believe any stupid nonsense!

Of course God is eternal. And His ways are not our ways. So why are you trying to view things where we have no reason to be? We were redeemed in time at the cross. this is not a difficult concept.

Such an argument assumes that God has not revealed ESSENTIAL truth in time to his people! We have a reason to be where God wants us! To claim that redemption at the cross denies eternal and transcendent redemption outside of time is most paradoxical.

Again, unitl you realize God is both transcendant and immenent, you will never see the truth of both.

Arrogant and condescending, such a baseless claim assumes the ignorance of those who post here–that they ACTUALLY deny the immanence of God! I guess that you believe that we are 3 year olds in our understanding of God’s immanence!

Who says they are in Heaven? Even Christ was in the grave 3 days!!!!

Ridiculous and Arian in the implications! If Christ was not with the Father in heaven during the 3 days that he was in the grave--he is not God! As God the CREATOR and SUSTAINER of all things, during that time he upheld all worlds by the word of his power!

There was no temporal heaven (Abraham’s Bosom) prior to the cross, that is sheer nonsense. The believers of old did not reside in Abrahams physical chest. The parable of Luke 16 certainly teaches that believers go to heaven and unbelievers go to a preliminary hell after death. That is it! All souls await the final judgment to assign their final destiny!

jmgipson
02-13-06, 05:23 AM
I was reading Hoeksema's Reformed dogmatics -Justification (Pg 93) and I found a statement that confused me. Quote: He freely assumed human flesh and blood. What is more, he entered into the state of sinners. He was not a sinner. The guilt of Adam could not be imputed to him, for he was personally the son of God.

How would this sin be paid for if not part of imputation. I am not sure if this is a typo and should read imparted to him or I somehow am incorrect in my assumption that the sin of Adam and all our personal sins was covered at the cross. What am I messed up on? I might be thinking THE SIN OF ADAM could not be imputed to him. It seems the same to me.

John

Tobias Crisp
02-13-06, 06:09 AM
I was reading Hoeksema's Reformed dogmatics -Justification (Pg 93) and I found a statement that confused me. Quote: He freely assumed human flesh and blood. What is more, he entered into the state of sinners. He was not a sinner. The guilt of Adam could not be imputed to him, for he was personally the son of God.

How would this sin be paid for if not part of imputation. I am not sure if this is a typo and should read imparted to him or I somehow am incorrect in my assumption that the sin of Adam and all our personal sins was covered at the cross. What am I messed up on? I might be thinking THE SIN OF ADAM could not be imputed to him. It seems the same to me.

JohnJohn, Hoeksema is speaking of the imputation of Adam's sin (Adam considered as a federal head), see Rom. 5. The imputation of Adam's sin is the basis for our guilt and sinful nature. He isn't speaking of the elect's sin being imputed to Christ at the cross.

~Anthony

Brandan
02-13-06, 06:13 AM
John, Hoeksema is speaking of the imputation of Adam's sin (Adam considered as a federal head), see Rom. 5. The imputation of Adam's sin is the basis for our guilt and sinful nature. He isn't speaking of the elect's sin being imputed to Christ at the cross.

~AnthonySo if the elect's sin was not imputed to Christ based on his obedience. What moment in time is imputation of the elect's sin based upon?

jmgipson
02-13-06, 06:39 AM
John, Hoeksema is speaking of the imputation of Adam's sin (Adam considered as a federal head), see Rom. 5. The imputation of Adam's sin is the basis for our guilt and sinful nature. He isn't speaking of the elect's sin being imputed to Christ at the cross.

~Anthony

Anthony,
I think I have lost some brain cells in my age so if I sound dumb forgive me but if Adams sin is imputed to us, and it is not imputed to Christ, how then can we be justified because Adams sin is still accounted to us? Did we not receive the sinful nature as the curse of God? This I agree would not be Christs (sinful nature). So maybe what I am understanding you to say is we were not imputed with adams sin but the penalty for his sin. Is this correct?

jmgipson
02-13-06, 07:01 AM
OK. I think I have it now. Original sin does not refer to the first sin but to the result of that first sin. The Scriptures speak repeatedly of sin and death entering the world through “one man’s transgression.” As a result of Adam’s sin, all men are now sinners. This is what Hoeksema is speaking of then. I have heard we were imputed with Adams sin so much I never thought what really was being said there. If this is wrong someone please send me in the right direction.

John

Brandan
02-13-06, 07:02 AM
I agree John. Anthony's response is very puzzling to me. Would you please clarify for us Anthony?

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 08:07 AM
Outrageous! Have you read Rom. 8:29-30? I’m sure that you have--but the truth of the passage is 100% at odds with what you are saying here. God did not only justify his elect from eternity, he GLORIFIED his elect from eternity! Yes, our future glorification in the New Earth (yet to be realized in history) was sure, certain, and settled transcendent of all time and space! The glorification of Christ’s saints is a future event in linear history yet already accomplished in God’s glorious plan as if it is PAST history! The same with justification. So those who deny eternal justification are AGAINST scripture as sure and certain as Pelagians, Semi-Pelagians, Arminians, Wesleyans, Amyraldians, Augustinians, infralapsarians, and any other ‘ism’ that would deny God’s full sovereignty

I have not said otherwise Bob. There is an undertow here that because I speak about justification taking place at the cross, somehow I am speaking as an open theist or something. The fact remains the vast majority of texts speak of God's declaration taking place at the cross. The romans passage does not say anything about eternity. I never realized what the denial of eternal justification brings such a sentence of comdenation.

Why could not Gods plan be to justify at the cross? I do not understand. The cross was not some replay of a movie. Regardless of being able to conclude this. Scripture speaks of one justification, by the blood of Christ, and this did nto happen before Calvary. Again you tie our salvation to creation, as in the 2 seeds thread. I tie it to the cross


Garbage and paradox theology at its worst! If we accept this gobbledygook, we might believe any stupid nonsense!

Oh yes, the dreaded paradox.


Such an argument assumes that God has not revealed ESSENTIAL truth in time to his people! We have a reason to be where God wants us! To claim that redemption at the cross denies eternal and transcendent redemption outside of time is most paradoxical.

I do not see the paradox. And neither has most people of history.



Arrogant and condescending, such a baseless claim assumes the ignorance of those who post here–that they ACTUALLY deny the immanence of God! I guess that you believe that we are 3 year olds in our understanding of God’s immanence!

Not at all Bob. I did nto mean to be arrogant. Just truthful as I see it. As an aside, why you or others can say basically the same thing, be assertive, but myself speaks as such and I am being arrogant is a double standard dont you think? :cool:




Ridiculous and Arian in the implications! If Christ was not with the Father in heaven during the 3 days that he was in the grave--he is not God! As God the CREATOR and SUSTAINER of all things, during that time he upheld all worlds by the word of his power!

I should have worded it better Bob. I should have used the words ascended into heaven.


There was no temporal heaven (Abraham’s Bosom) prior to the cross, that is sheer nonsense. The believers of old did not reside in Abrahams physical chest. The parable of Luke 16 certainly teaches that believers go to heaven and unbelievers go to a preliminary hell after death. That is it! All souls await the final judgment to assign their final destiny!


Instead of just saying it is so. Wy not address the scripture of John 3;13 and Acts 2:34, and Paul speaking of Christ being the first to rise. That is fair of me to ask this is it not?

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 08:41 AM
Another part of scripture I find compeeling to support justification at the cross is Romans 5:7



6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. 10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life


Verse 7 shows that were were not righteouss. That is why Christ died for us. The righteouss for the unrighteouss. IT says a righteous man would not die for another righteouss man..

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 10:08 AM
IMPUTATION AT THE CROSS: God tells us in Romans 4:25 " Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification". Literally it can read Who was delivered because our offences, and was raised again because our justification. Sin demands death. Righteousness demands life. The grave could not hold Christ because He established a perfect righteousness for the elect at the cross. Righteousness demands life. Christ was resurrected from the grave BECAUSE OUR JUSTIFICATION: in other words, when Christ was resurrected our justification had already taken place- at the cross. And the only way one can be justified is by righteousness imputed. So, when speaking "in time", Christ's righteousness was imputed to us at the cross: "raised again for our justification".......Kentucky Kid

I agree with this 100%. Even without adding the quotation remark "in Time" I never see scripture use this phrase regarding this transaction. So why must we add it? That is my delima

Tobias Crisp
02-13-06, 11:40 AM
I agree John. Anthony's response is very puzzling to me. Would you please clarify for us Anthony?Just a quick comment and I have to go. I guess I don't see where my comment was puzzling. It's very basic. We are conceived in sin, Christ was not. This was the reason for my reference to Romans 5. Our conception in sin is from Adam, via imputation. That is all Hoeksema was saying.

Puzzled at the puzzlement. :)

~Anthony

Tobias Crisp
02-13-06, 11:45 AM
So if the elect's sin was not imputed to Christ based on his obedience. What moment in time is imputation of the elect's sin based upon?See my comment to John. The elect's sin is imputed to Christ on the Cross, you should know by now where I stand on this, per my stand on the Christ made sin issue. Christ was not conceived in sin like we are which is through imputation. We are discussing two separate imputations: the sin of Adam to all man, and the sin of the elect to Christ at the Cross. Again, I think this is basic and there must be some misunderstanding of what I was saying. I thought my reference to Romans 5 would have made things clear.

~Anthony

Brandan
02-13-06, 11:53 AM
Thanks Anthony.

ray kikkert
02-13-06, 01:10 PM
Ok Ray: Here it goes. Where did Elijah go?

First and foremost, The account of Elijah writing a letter to Jehorom recorded in 2 Chronicles 21:12-15 shows the Elijah was transported "Some where else" in the whirlwind. Scriptures speak of 3 heavens. 1) The Heaven of Gods throne( 2 Corinthians 12:2, 2) Genesis 22:17 "I will multiply your seed as the stars of the heaven . . . " This is outer space per se, where the stars and planets are, 3) Jeremiah 4:25 " . . . and all the birds of the heavens were fled." This is our atmosphere. This is where Elijah was seen traveling. And obviously somewhere else on the earth. Exactly like the account of Steven in Acts. The SPirit took him to some other place.

Well it seems superman has nothing on Elijah. I wonder who exactly seen Elijah travelling about?? Maybe they were mistaken. Maybe it was ET ??

There is nothing in the verses that state that Elijah was taken "somewhere else" Maybe you are reading this from the Watchtower Bible??

Anyways, here is what Gill states regarding 2 Chronicles 21:

2 Chronicles 21:12 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Chronicles/21.html#12)

Ver. 12. And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet,.... Not what was written by him after his ascension to heaven, and from thence came to Jehoram, even seven years after that, as say some Jewish writers {z}; nor was it a writing from another person of the same name in those times, since of such an one we nowhere read; nor from Elisha bearing the name of Elijah, having a double portion of his spirit on him, since he is never so called; but this was a writing of Elijah's before his ascension, who, foreseeing by a spirit of prophecy what Jehoram would be guilty of, wrote this, and gave it to one of the prophets, as Kimchi suggests, and most probably to Elisha, to communicate it to him at a proper time; and who might, as the above writer intimates, think it came immediately from heaven:"


.. I will respond more in due course, LOL:p

jmgipson
02-13-06, 01:18 PM
I get it now. Thanks Anthony

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 01:39 PM
[/font]

Well it seems superman has nothing on Elijah. I wonder who exactly seen Elijah travelling about?? Maybe they were mistaken. Maybe it was ET ??

There is nothing in the verses that state that Elijah was taken "somewhere else" Maybe you are reading this from the Watchtower Bible??

Anyways, here is what Gill states regarding 2 Chronicles 21:

2 Chronicles 21:12 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/2_Chronicles/21.html#12)

Ver. 12. And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet,.... Not what was written by him after his ascension to heaven, and from thence came to Jehoram, even seven years after that, as say some Jewish writers {z}; nor was it a writing from another person of the same name in those times, since of such an one we nowhere read; nor from Elisha bearing the name of Elijah, having a double portion of his spirit on him, since he is never so called; but this was a writing of Elijah's before his ascension, who, foreseeing by a spirit of prophecy what Jehoram would be guilty of, wrote this, and gave it to one of the prophets, as Kimchi suggests, and most probably to Elisha, to communicate it to him at a proper time; and who might, as the above writer intimates, think it came immediately from heaven:"


.. I will respond more in due course, LOL:p


Could you just stop with Gill for one moment Ray. Why do you not question it happening to Stephen, but with Elijah you have an issue.

I presented what you asked for, with scripture, no confession nor comentary.

Now I ask you do the same or drop it. Please address the scriptures without paroting Gill. ASk you pastor as you said you would.

ray kikkert
02-13-06, 02:03 PM
Could you just stop with Gill for one moment Ray. Why do you not question it happening to Stephen, but with Elijah you have an issue.

I presented what you asked for, with scripture, no confession nor comentary.

Now I ask you do the same or drop it. Please address the scriptures without paroting Gill. ASk you pastor as you said you would.

Oh I am far from being done Joe.

I have yet to comment on your definition of just what exactly happened to Stephen and where in fact he went.

But first I have to deal with the next vain philospohy of Joe and that found in 2 Corinthians 12; 1, 2.

Here Paul is speaking of himself. Now I do not know Joe why you picked on this verse to give advocacy for both Elijah and Stephen to be flying about in the universe. (maybe to go on another wild adventure with ET perhaps??)

Anyways, lets deal with the text Joe.

Here is John Calvins commentary on the above text:

1. It is not expedient for me to glory. Now, when as it were in the middle of the course, he restrains himself from proceeding farther, and in this way he most appropriately reproves the impudence of his rivals and declares that it is with reluctance, that he engages in this sort of contest with them. For what a shame it was to scrape together from every quarter commendations, or rather to go a-begging for them, that they might be on a level with so distinguished a man! As to the latter, he admonishes them by his own example, that the more numerous and the more excellent the graces by which any one of us is distinguished, so much the less ought he to think of his own excellence. For such a thought is exceedingly dangerous, because, like one entering into a labyrinth, the person is immediately dazzled, so as to be too quick-sighted in discerning his gifts, 3 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf3) while in the mean time he is ignorant of himself. Paul is afraid, lest this should befall him. The graces conferred by God are, indeed, to be acknowledged, that we may be aroused, -- first, to gratitude for them, and secondly, to the right improvement of them; but to take occasion from them to boast -- that is what cannot be done without great danger.
For I will come 4 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf4) to visions."I shall not creep on the ground, but will be constrained to mount aloft. Hence I am afraid, lest the height of my gifts should hurry me on, so as to lead me to forget myself." And certainly, if Paul had gloried ambitiously, he would have fallen headlong from a lofty eminence; for it is humility alone, that can give stability to our greatness in the sight of God.
Between visions and revelations there is this distinction -- that a revelation is often made either in a dream, or by an oracle, without any thing being presented to the eye, while a vision is scarcely ever afforded without a revelation, or in other words, without the Lord's discovering what is meant by it. 5 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf5)
2. I knew a man in Christ. As he was desirous to restrain himself within bounds, he merely singles out one instance, and that, too, he handles in such a way as to show, that it is not from inclination that he brings it forward; for why does he speak in the person of another rather than in his own? It is as though he had said, "I should have preferred to be silent, I should have preferred to keep the whole matter suppressed within my own mind, but those persons 6 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf6) will not allow me. I shall mention it, therefore, as it were in a stammering way, that it may be seen that I speak through constraint." Some think that the clause in Christ is introduced for the purpose of confirming what he says. I view it rather as referring to the disposition, so as to intimate that Paul has not here an eye to himself, but looks to Christ exclusively.
When he confesses, that he does not know whether he was in the body, or out of the body, he expresses thereby the more distinctly the greatness of the revelation. For he means, that God dealt with him in such a way, 7 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf7) that he did not himself understand the manner of it. Nor should this appear to us incredible, inasmuch as he sometimes manifests himself to us in such a way, that the manner of his doing so is, nevertheless, hid from our view. 8 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf8) At the same time, this does not, in any degree, detract from the assurance of faith, which rests simply on this single point -- that we are aware that God speaks to us. Nay more, let us learn from this, that we must seek the knowledge of those things only that are necessary to be known, and leave other things to God. (Deuteronomy 29:29 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Deuteronomy+29:29,).) He says, then, that he does not know, whether he was wholly taken up -- soul and body -- into heaven, or whether it was his soul only, that was caught up.
Fourteen years ago. Some 9 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf9) enquire, also, as to the place, but it does not belong to us to satisfy their curiosity. 10 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf10) The Lord manifested himself to Paul in the beginning by a vision, when he designed to convert him from Judaism to the faith of the gospel, but he was not then admitted as yet into those secrets, as he needed even to be instructed by Ananias in the first rudiments. 11 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf11) (Acts 9:12 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Acts+9:12,).) That vision, therefore, was nothing but a preparation, with the view of rendering him teachable. It may be, that, in this instance, lie refers to that vision, of which he makes mention also, according to Luke's narrative. (Acts 22:17 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Acts+22:17,).) There is no occasion, however, for our giving ourselves much trouble as to these conjectures, as we see that Paul himself kept silence respecting it for fourteen years, 12 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf12) and would not have said one word in reference to it, had not the unreasonableness of malignant persons constrained him.
Even to the third heaven. He does not here distinguish between the different heavens in the manner of the philosophers, so as to assign to each planet its own heaven. On the other hand, the number three is made use of (kat ejzoch<n) by way of eminence, to denote what is highest and most complete. Nay more, the term heaven, taken by itself, denotes here the blessed and glorious kingdom of God, which is above all the spheres, 13 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf13) and the firmament itself, and even the entire frame-work of the world. Paul, however, not contenting himself with the simple term, 14 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf14) adds, that he had reached even the greatest height, and the innermost recesses. For our faith scales heaven and enters it, and those that are superior to others in knowledge get higher in degree and elevation, but to reach the third heavens has been granted to very few.
4. In paradise. 15 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf15) As every region that is peculiarly agreeable and delightful 16 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnf16) is called in the Scriptures the garden of God, it came from this to be customary among the Greeks to employ the term paradise to denote the heavenly glory, even previously to Christ's advent, as appears from Ecclesiasticus. (Sirach, 40, 17, 27.) It is also used in this sense in Luke 23:43 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Luke+23:43,), in Christ's answer to the robber -- "To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise," that is, "Thou shalt enjoy the presence of God, in the condition and life of the blessed."

"I will come Marg 'For I will' Our Translators have omitted (ga<r), for, in the text, evidently supposing that it is a mere expletive. Doddridge renders it ' nevertheless.' But it seems to me that it contains an important sense, and that it should be rendered by then. ' Since it is not fit that I should glory, then I will refer to visions, etc. I will turn away, then, from that subject, and come to another.' Thus the word (ga<r), for, is used in John 7:41 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=John+7:41,), ' Shall then (mh< ga<r) Christ come out of Galilee?' Acts 8:31 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Acts+8:31,), ' How can I then (tw~v ga<r) except some man should guide me?'" -- Barnes. Granville Penn renders the passage as follows: "Must I needs boast? it is not good indeed, yet I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord." This rendering he adopts, as corresponding with the reading of the Vat. and most ancient MS. Kauca~sqai dei~ ouj sumfe>ron me<n ejleu>somai de< eijv ojptasi>av kai< ajpokalu>yeiv Kuri>ou -- Ed.
5 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb5) "C'est qu'il sign/fie en ce qui s'est presente a nous;" -- "What he intends in what is presented to our view."
"Visions" (ojptasi>av) -- symbolical representations of spiritual and celestial things, in which matters of the deepest importance are exhibited to the eve of the mind by a variety of emblems, the nature and properties of which serve to illustrate those spiritual things. -- Revelations (ajpokalu>yeiv) -- a manifestation of things not before known, and such as God alone can make known, because they are a part of his own inscrutable counsels." -- Dr. A. Clarke. -- Ed.

6 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb6) "Ces opiniastres ambitieux;" -- "Those ambitious, obstinate persons."

7 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb7) "Que Dieu a tellement besongne et precede enuers luy;" -- That God had in such a manner wrought and acted towards him."

8 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb8) "Est incomprehensible a nostre sens;" -- "Is incomprehensible to our mind."

9 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb9) "Ne se contentans point de ceci;" -- "Not contenting themselves with this."

10 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb10) "Mais nous n'auons point delibere, et aussi il n'est pas en nous de satisfaire a leur curiosite;" -- "But we have not determined as to this, and it does not belong to us to satisfy their curiosity."

11 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb11) "Es premiers commencemens de la religion;" -- "In the first elements of religion."

12 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb12) "This vision Paul had kept secret for fourteen years. He had doubtless often thought of it; and the remembrance of that glorious hour was doubtless one of the reasons why he bore trials so patiently, and was willing to endure so much. But before this he had had no occasion to mention it. He had other proofs in abundance that he was called to the work of an Apostle; and to mention this would savour of pride and ostentation. It was only when he was compelled to refer to the evidences of his apostolic mission that he refers to it here." -- Barnes. -- Ed.

13 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb13) "Par dessus tons les cieux;" -- "Above all the heavens."

14 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb14) "Non content de nommer simplement le ciel;" -- "Not contented with simply employing the term heaven."

15 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb15) "The word paradise (para>deisov) occurs but three times in the:New Testament, (Luke 23:43 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Luke+23:43,), 2 Corinthians 12:4 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=2Corinthians+12:4,), and Revelation 2:7 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Revelation+2:7,).) It occurs often in the Septuagint, as the translation of the word garden, (Ng) gan; and of the word (odrp) pardes, in Nehemiah 2:8 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Nehemiah+2:8,), Ecclesiastes 2:5 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Ecclesiastes+2:5,), Cant. 2:13. It is a word which had its origin in the language of Eastern Asia, and which has been adopted in the Greek, the Roman, and other western languages. In Sanscrit, the word paradesha means a land elevated and cultivated; in Armenian, pardes denotes a garden around the house, planted with trees, shrubs, grass:for use and ornament. In Persia, the word denotes the pleasure-gardens, and parks with wild animals, around the country residences of the monarchs and princes. Hence it denotes, in general, a garden of pleasure; and in the New Testament is applied to the abodes of the blessed after death, the dwelling-place of God, and of happy spirits; or to heaven as a place of blessedness." -- Barnes. -- Ed.

16 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol40/htm/xviii.htm#_fnb16) "Toute region delectable et excellente en fertilite et abundance de biens de la terre;" -- "Every region that is delightful and distinguished by fertility and abundance of the good things of the earth."

...... so Joe even here the idea of floating about in the universe is NOT what is meant with the apostle.

Man, with all these saints floating about , it is a wonder they have not bumped into each other.

But in Joe's world they do and greet each other with " greetings and hallucinations"........ LOL;)

Brandan
02-13-06, 02:42 PM
Answers to Joe:
Outrageous! Have you read Rom. 8:29-30? I’m sure that you have--but the truth of the passage is 100% at odds with what you are saying here. God did not only justify his elect from eternity, he GLORIFIED his elect from eternity! Yes, our future glorification in the New Earth (yet to be realized in history) was sure, certain, and settled transcendent of all time and space! The glorification of Christ’s saints is a future event in linear history yet already accomplished in God’s glorious plan as if it is PAST history! The same with justification. So those who deny eternal justification are AGAINST scripture as sure and certain as Pelagians, Semi-Pelagians, Arminians, Wesleyans, Amyraldians, Augustinians, infralapsarians, and any other ‘ism’ that would deny God’s full sovereigntyAmen Bob! Amen! It's one thing to be ignorant of this doctrine, but it's another thing to actively fight against it. Those that would oppose Justification from Eternity and call it a blasphemy have not yet been enlightened to the truth and are indeed denying the Sovereignty of God. They are denying God Himself for to deny His attributes is to deny Him. To make God bound to time or to make Him mutable is to side with pelagianism.

I lump those that would fight against this doctrine with pelagians and any other group that would deny the Sovereignty of God! I have hopes for those on this site that aren't clear in their understanding and the men who preached in Albany. But if they continually reject this doctrine, I will have to conclude that I am not united with them in the doctrine of Christ. This is true for both those who believe that God's people are not justified before the cross or before conversion because they share the exact same error. Those that fight against justification from eternity make God dependent upon what happens in time and thus have fashioned a god after their own vain imagination.

jmgipson
02-13-06, 02:54 PM
So far my take on justification:


before faith1) in the decree of God in eternity;
2) in the resurrection of Christ


by faith1) actual justification, which takes place in regeneration, in which faith is wrought in the soul as a living plant of the Holy Spirit, in which the elect is justified on the side of God and is placed in a state of reconciliation with God;

2) passive justification, in the tribunal of conscience, when the Holy Spirit gives the assurance of justification before God in Christ.


Finally, the elect shall be justified at the second coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven, when the wicked shall be condemned, but they in their resurrection shall be declared righteous, and shall inherit the kingdom prepared for them before the foundation of the world. (kersten)
Sound good.

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 03:00 PM
Amen Bob! Amen! It's one thing to be ignorant of this doctrine, but it's another thing to actively fight against it. Those that would oppose Justification from Eternity and call it a blasphemy have not yet been enlightened to the truth and are indeed denying the Sovereignty of God. They are denying God Himself for to deny His attributes is to deny Him. To make God bound to time or to make Him mutable is to side with pelagianism.

I never said it was a blasphemy BK. I said it is not spoken of in the writ. How may I ask does denying this = the following?

1) not enlighted to the truth. you state something as I did, yet Bob paddles me with the word arrogant.

2) Denying the Sovereignty of God

3) Denying Him

4) making Him mutable.


There is no support for this dominoe theory you propse here. As I mentioned before, this happens alot here. Perhaps I am denying the trinity, virgin birth, hypostatic union too!!!!:eek:


I lump those that would fight against this doctrine with pelagians and any other group that would deny the Sovereignty of God! I have hopes for those on this site that aren't clear in their understanding and the men who preached in Albany. But if they continually reject this doctrine, I will have to conclude that I am not united with them in the doctrine of Christ. This is true for both those who believe that God's people are not justified before the cross or before conversion because they share the exact same error. Those that fight against justification from eternity make God dependent upon what happens in time and thus have fashioned a god after their own vain imagination.

This is no way makes God dependant upon anything BK. He is only dependant on Himself. He sets the conditions and fullfils them Himself.

Perhaps I have not been clear. GOd knows all , He is omniscent, He knows who will be reigning in Heaven, why? Because He decreed it. But He decreed how this will happen, and only through the death of His beloved Son.

SO instead of a pom pom waving pep rally, I would still like scripture references that support the fact the elect are justified before creation.

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 03:06 PM
So far my take on justification:


before faith1) in the decree of God in eternity;
2) in the resurrection of Christ


by faith1) actual justification, which takes place in regeneration, in which faith is wrought in the soul as a living plant of the Holy Spirit, in which the elect is justified on the side of God and is placed in a state of reconciliation with God;

2) passive justification, in the tribunal of conscience, when the Holy Spirit gives the assurance of justification before God in Christ.


Finally, the elect shall be justified at the second coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven, when the wicked shall be condemned, but they in their resurrection shall be declared righteous, and shall inherit the kingdom prepared for them before the foundation of the world. (kersten)
Sound good.

I do not know if this 3 fold process of Justifications is correct. Here is an article by Ken Wimer who is spot on concerning this.

Lump him in too brandan.


THE SINNER’S JUSTIFICATION BEFORE GOD
By Ken Wimer, Shreveport Grace Church, Shreveport, LA


Reading the Bible superficially, there are many words or phrases that, when not understood in their proper context, would lead us into error. Why? The Bible is a spiritual book, inspired by the Spirit of God in its original format, and thereby may only be understood properly when taught by the Spirit.

The purpose of this study is to take a close look at the doctrine of justification as taught in the Scriptures. Many a commentator has declared that this is the most vital doctrine of the whole of Scripture, and yet as you read and study various authors, or listen to preachers who claim to know something on the subject, there is such divergence as well. This may raise the question, “How can so many people, read and study the same portions of Scripture, and still come up with so many interpretations?” The answer to that is two-fold.
1. Some truths are difficult because they require thought, study, and above all a humble spirit which only the Spirit of God can give. It’s like mathematics. You might even teach a parrot to repeat 2 + 2= 4. However, the deep things of algebra and geometry, and some of the theorems and problems of most parts of mathematics require a good teacher and a mind to learn. In Scripture, there are such truths that even natural minds may learn and repeat, such as is taught in catechisms and simple Bible lessons. However, to understand the truth of how God can be just and justify sinners, and the implications of that to the sinner, none other than the Spirit of God Himself can and does reveal it.[1] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn1)
2. Some truths are not what they appear to be on the surface and therefore require study of the words and the context in light of the whole of Scripture. We are all tempted to judge suddenly according to outward appearances. We do that with people, but also with doctrine. Some read ‘For God so loved the world,’ and interpret that to mean that God loves everyone without exception. Only a study of the whole of Scripture in context with verses such as ‘Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated,[2] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn2)’ can the love of God be understood in its proper context. It doesn’t mean that God loves everyone without exception, but certainly means that He is no respecter of persons, and thereby loves without distinction sinners from every part of the world, revealed by those who do by Him believe on Christ. They believe and love Christ because He first loved them[3] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn3).

The truth of justification is just such a subject. Some who look at it with the natural eye and human wisdom may conclude that our works, will, or faith have something to do with it. However, with eyes that the Spirit gives, one will see that it is entirely grounded upon the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ that He accomplished in His obedience unto death. Terms like ‘justified by faith,’ or ‘justified by works’ will be properly understood in their context, once the foundational truth of ‘justification by Christ’s blood’ is received and believed through the Spirit’s teaching.
In light of recent questions some have asked me regarding this very subject, I have been challenged, and I trust led of the Lord to endeavor to put my thoughts down in a concise manner for the benefit of those who may be interested. I have numerous friends who are of differing persuasions and therefore it makes this task all the more difficult in commenting on a subject wherein I may find myself in disagreement with them. Nevertheless, my purpose is not to impugn anyone personally, but simply to set forth this great doctrine of justification in a simple, straightforward manner, according to what light I trust the Lord has given me, with the prayer that where any of us need more light, that the Lord grant us repentance of every false way..

The need for clarification on the subject of justification is evident because where one places the timing of our justification before God, reveals what one believes about how God justifies sinners. Some might shrug their shoulders and say, “WHEN is not important, it’s HOW God justifies sinners, or THAT God justifies sinners that matters.” However, after prayerful consideration of this argument, my persuasion is that “WHEN” and “HOW” cannot be separated. Where you place the justification of sinners is vital. At the outset I am defining justification as “that act of God whereby he absolves sinners of all guilt before His holy law, and declares them righteous before Him, based on a just payment and satisfaction of His law and holiness.”[4] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn4)

FOUR-FOLD JUSTIFICATION THEORY EXPLAINED

Among other teachings on justification today, there is a four-fold justification view that is prominent among many sovereign grace congregations with whom I have been associated over the past 20 years. However, the more I study the Scriptures in light of when the elect sinner’s justification was accomplished, I am persuaded that the four-fold justification teaching does not represent what the Scriptures teach and is in the end misleading to those who would know the truth. It boils down to whether the sinner’s justification involves repeated acts of God justifying (in eternity, at the cross, upon faith, and through works) or a once-for-all settling of the matter of the sinner’s guilt and righteousness before God by the just payment of the Substitute, the Lord Jesus.
Various proof texts are used to defend the four-fold justification theory. However, I would ask the reader to carefully consider the following analysis of that doctrine, and weigh it against what I believe is the Scriptural teaching, that the sinner’s justification was fully and completely accomplished once-for-all at the cross, 2 Corinthians 5:21. It was there that God the Father put to the account of His Son, the Substitute, all of the sin of all of His elect of all time[5] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn5), and in an immediate, simultaneous, all-encompassing transaction, put Christ’s righteousness to their account as well, thereby legally justifying them as holy and righteous before God, on the sole ground of Christ’s finished work.
In contrast to this once-for-all justifying of God’s elect at the cross, those who hold to four-fold justification teach the following four points regarding justification:
1. Eternal justification.
This view is that those whom God decreed to save in eternity, He justified then in Christ by that decree. Men like John Gill and John Brine taught this. Where Revelation 13:8, speaks of Christ as the Lamb slain FROM the foundation of the world, they interpret it to mean BEFORE the foundation of the world. Therefore the proponents of eternal justification say that the elect were declared just with God, absolved of all sin and guilt, forgiven of all iniquity, made righteous by divine imputation, and accepted as perfectly righteous in Christ as the Surety, even before God created the world[6] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn6). .
2. Justification at the cross.
This states that those whom God justified in eternity He then in time justified again by the death of the Lord Jesus Christ as the Substitute. There was, they say, an absolving of guilt and an imputing of righteousness in eternity, of which the cross is the outworking of what was already accomplished then. It is my persuasion that God purposed and determined the justification of sinners in eternity, and fulfilled and accomplished it at the cross. However to say that it was done in eternity, even before it was completed at the cross is to change the nature of Christ’s victorious cry, “It is finished.” It was only finished when He paid the price of redemption and thereby delivered His elect from the penalty of the law, when he was made to be sin for them, Romans 3:24-26.
3. Justification by faith.
Here it is not so easy to define because there are so many different interpretations given as to what ‘justification by faith’ means. There is no question that it is a Scriptural term used in various places,[7] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn7) but there are three different interpretations that I have heard and read by those of sovereign grace persuasion.

· Some explain justification by faith as God actually justifying the sinner when He gives them faith to believe and not before. They teach that even though Christ died for His people at the cross and took their sin on Himself, yet God does not impute righteousness to them until they believe. Some go as far as to say that they are still under God’s wrath until they believe. In the words of one writer- “The very moment faith believes the promise and receives Christ's righteousness, God's wrath is removed and the believing sinner is adopted into God's family and actually entitled to the full inheritance of grace. Before, and until we actually possess justifying faith, we are guilty, defiled sinners, under the wrath of God (John 3:36; Rom. 6:17, 18; 1 John 5:12).”

· Others teach that it is by faith that you appropriate to yourself the righteousness of Christ. In other words, they say that when Christ finished the work at the cross, God put the sin of the elect to the account of the elect, but the righteousness of Christ although theoretically imputed at the cross, does not actually get imputed until the sinner by faith receives it. They insist that it is not conditioned on faith, but the sinner must receive it for it to become his/hers. In essence then, God will not declare that one just until they have believed. Faith is said to be the channel, or instrument of justification. They quote Romans 5:1 here as a proof text.


· Some say that each time an elect sinner believes, at the point of conversion, there is an actual sprinkling of the blood to the heart and conscience of each elect sinner. This view implies an individual sprinkling of blood and imputation of righteousness, multiple times, for as many as there are elect, rather than the once-for-all imputation globally for the elect upon the death of Christ- 2 Corinthians 5:21.
4. Justification by works.
In my mind, it is inconceivable that anyone who believes the message of God’s sovereign grace in Christ would even include this in a discussion of what justifies the sinner before God. Nevertheless, it is made part of the four-fold package. The only place in Scripture where ‘justified by works’ is used in Scripture is in James 2:14-26. However, a proper understanding of the context shows that James is not stating what justifies the sinner before God, but rather what are those works that give evidence of being justified before men. Here, I am not aware of any grace preachers who would say that our works are the ground of our justification, but left without explanation and declared as one of the ‘four-folds’ of the sinner’s justification before God, it appears to make works an element in the sinner’s justification before God.

CONFUSION OF TERMINOLOGY AND PERSPECTIVE

While parts of the four-fold view of justification may appear sound to some, yet the overall portrayal of justification as four-part acts of God, clouds the very nature of the meaning of justification (the accounting of sin to the Savior and upon death the imputing of righteousness to the account of the sinner). For this reason, we must be careful to define such an important doctrine exactly as God declares. There are some who may still be saying that this is too complicated, why can’t you just make it simple. My answer is that it is not the truth that is complicated, but rather our own misapprehensions of the truth. There is nothing complicated about election. God chose whom He will save, Romans 9:16. The difficulty is in believing it. The same may be said with Christ’s work of redemption, justification, and our sanctification in Him by His death. The simple truth is that it was accomplished in His death at the cross. The complication arises with those who say, “Yes, but…there is also justification in eternity and by faith.”
I acknowledge that certain words and phrases of Scripture may lend themselves to confusion, unless there is a clear foundation of the truth laid first. For example, the Bible speaks of Christ as the Savior of the world (1 John 4:14), but it requires a revelation of Christ from the rest of Scripture to understand that it means that He is the Savior of sinners out of every tribe, nation, and tongue (Revelation 5:9), and not every single person in the world. The same is true of expressions like ‘justification by faith.’ What does it really mean?
With that in mind, I would ask the Lord to remove from our minds any preconceived notions regarding justification that would divert from the full, free, and unique act that Christ accomplished at the cross for His people to the satisfaction of God the Father.
First, the notion that God could declare sinners just and acquitted from eternity, even before there was any sin to impute, or an actual righteousness worked out in the flesh by a just Substitute. Hebrews 9:16 states: “For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.” Simply put, the eternal decree of God to justify sinners, and there names written in the Lambs book of life from eternity, is likened to the preparation of a will and testament. It is certain to be, but is not ratified UNTIL the death of the testator. In Luke 1:72, Zechariah prophesied of the coming of our Lord Jesus “to perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant.” Again, the holy covenant was what the Father and Son eternally agreed upon for the justification of the elect, but the performing of it was what brought the mercy and enabled God to be just and justify. God decreed mercy through the Son in the eternal covenant, but mercy could not be shown at the expense of justice.[8] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn8)
Can you imagine a young suitor reasoning with a father that because he had determined to marry his daughter, and the daughter and he were in agreement, that he then could legally declare the daughter as his wife and become one with her even before the wedding, without any legal transaction? No, first there is the prearrangement, but then there is the legal action whereby the two wed in proper order. Because the young man has the father’s agreement, and has given the bride-to-be an engagement ring, it does not mean that she is his wife until they come together in the solemn ratification of their matrimonial vows. Even so, it is in the justification of God’s elect. The agreement between the Father and the Son is eternal, immutable, and certain.[9] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn9) However, there had to be the coming, living, and dying of the Son to pay the ransom price, in order for God to be just and justify those He chose to give His Son.
To state that God from eternity absolved the elect of all sin and guilt, forgave them of all iniquity, made them righteous by divine imputation, and accepted them as perfectly righteous in Christ as the Surety, even before He created the world is not only to put the cart before the horse, but completely turn it over. If this is so, then did the fall of Adam not bring the elect into condemnation, if God had already justified them from eternity? Were they justified and then unjustified only to be justified again by the death of our Lord?
Those who teach ‘eternal justification,’ build mainly a logical argument, which is evident in reading the treatise by John Brine referred to earlier. He does an able work in showing that faith is not the condition for justification, but the evidence, and uses many Scripture verses to support it. However, in the second portion of his treatise he argues for ‘eternal justification.’ In so doing, what is remarkable is the lack of scriptural support, in light even of the absence of the term ‘eternal justification’ in the Word of God.
Those who hold to the doctrine of ‘eternal justification’ use three particular passages of Scripture, among others, to support their doctrine.
1. Revelation 13:8- ‘the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world’ This is often quoted to mean that in God’s mind, His decree to sacrifice His Son was as good as done because He decreed it, and therefore, He could legally declare them righteous even before Christ had a body to sacrifice or had shed His blood in a just payment for their sin. However, the expression ‘from the foundation of the world’ literally means, ‘from its inception’ (since it was ‘laid down’ or created). When the Scripture refers to eternity it uses the phrase “BEFORE the foundation of the world.”[10] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn10) However, with regard to the expression ‘FROM the foundation of the world, Christ used this same terminology to describe the guilt of the Jewish nation for the blood of the prophets shed ‘from the foundation of the world, Luke 11:50.’ He certainly did not mean there ‘from eternity.’ So how is Christ the Lamb slain ‘from the foundation of the world, or since the creation of the world? He is in type, picture, and promise, beginning in the garden of Eden immediately after the Fall, all the way through the Passover lambs slain, the morning and evening sacrifices, the Day of Atonement, and culminating with him actually coming and laying down His life. All of the Old Testament from Genesis to Malachi speaks to His blood and righteousness in all of the various types.
Could he be slain from eternity without a body? The Scriptures specifically speak of God the Father preparing Him a body, in order that He should suffer and die, the just for the unjust, Hebrews 10:5. God could not suffer and die, and therefore He had to take on him the body of those he came to represent from conception to death in order to be their sin-bearer, Hebrews 2:17.
2. Romans 8:30- “Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” Because the verse begins with predestination, commentators who support ‘eternal justification’ state that everything that follows took place then as well. They cite the use of the verbs in the aorist tense, (translated as past tense in our English language). There are, however, two other viable explanations to this passage, keeping the entire context in mind from Romans 8:28 through the end of the chapter.
First, it is an over simplification to say that the aorist always refers to past action. In fact, in most cases except the ‘infinitive’ the Greek language used the aorist without reference to time. This is a hard tense to translate into the English language because we do not have its exact equivalent. The Greek writers often used the aorist simply to state a fact or certainty, or singleness of act.[11] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn11) A good simple illustration of this is in the prayer of the publican in Luke 18:13, “…God be merciful (aorist) to me a sinner.” It denotes a certain request for mercy without reference to time.[12] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn12) In light of this, Romans 8:30 may be interpreted simply as stating the truth that any sinners who are called, justified, and glorified, it is because God predestinated them, without using the aorist as an argument that this was already history before it happened.
A second viable explanation of the aorist is that the apostle is referring to the result of the elect being conformed to Christ’s image as the Representative Man in his coming, living, dying, and rising again. Romans 8:29 declares that those whom God chose and predestined in eternity, He did in order “to be” conformed to the image of His Son, or “in the likeness” of His Son. It says they were predestinated to it, not pre-justified. The very sense of the word ‘predestinated,’ implies a plan or purpose to be accomplished in time. The prefix ‘pre’ indicates something ordained before hand, not as already done. The conforming to the image of Christ is what took place in His life of obedience as the God-Man, whereby His elect were ‘made the righteousness of God in Him,’ 2 Corinthians 5:21. That word ‘made’ means literally ‘to become,’ what they weren’t before. If the elect had been made righteous already in eternity, by God’s simple decree, you would not find this word here.
The proper meaning then is that God in choosing out sinners He would save determined before hand that He would make them like His Son. It does not say He created them that way, but He would certainly make them like Him. You have to read on in the context to see how He would accomplish that in time. The obvious answer is in Romans 8:29-30. The use of the aorist tenses again is forward looking to what God would do in and by His Son to make them like Him.[13] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn13)
Those who hold to justification upon faith of the sinner will note that ‘calling’ is put before justification, Romans 8:30. However, the term ‘called’ here is not with reference to regeneration. It is a different word referring to those whom God has ‘named’ in His predestinating grace, and for whom Christ should come and die, in order to justify them. In Romans 8:28, the calling is with reference to the special internal summons or call of the Spirit of grace according to what God has purposed. However, in verse 30 it is another word altogether meaning ‘named.’
We have these two examples of the word ‘calling’ in English. What you call your children, means, what you namethem. However, you may call (summons) them to the table, but that is different than calling (naming) them: John, Mary, Peter, etc. I believe then that the proper interpretation of verse 30 is that those God predestined, He called ‘named’ in Christ. The picture here is of the High Priest going into the Holiest of Holies with the names of the people on His breastplate. It shows that Christ in coming did so for a particular chosen people, whom God named in eternal election. The ‘ordo salutus’ (order of salvation) is this. Those God saved, He first predestined in Christ and called (named or elected) to be His, and then justified. The confusion comes in making the justification simultaneous with the predestinating, but the following verses clearly put the time of justification at the death of Christ, vv. 32, 33. The evident conclusion is that what God purposed in eternity, He fulfilled in time in the death of His Son, when you read the entire context.
So it is also with the glorification of those whom God predestined and whom He justified by the death of His Son. Their glorification God accomplished in raising His Son from the grave and setting Him on high. Those for whom He died and rose again were glorified in Him when He rose, ascended, and sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on High, Philippians 2:9. This was the very subject of Christ’s prayer in the garden, John 17:22, 24. The glorification here is not a reference to the future state of glory, although that is indeed the end of what Christ accomplished. In this context, however, it is His elect being glorified with the glory of Christ, given Him because of His faithful fulfilling of all the requirements and conditions for the salvation of His people.
In conclusion, when Paul wrote these words under the inspiration of the Spirit, Christ had already died and fulfilled them by His death. It would seem reasonable then that the Spirit directed him to put the verbs in the aorist tense to show the certainty of what Christ accomplished. This is the most reliable way of interpreting this text, rather than confuse purpose with fulfillment, and trying to make something yet to be accomplished as already done.
3. I Timothy 1:9-9 ”Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.” This is the third verse that proponents of eternal justification cite, making salvation eternal and simultaneous with God’s purpose of grace. While there is no question that salvation is of the Lord, and that none will be saved but those whom He purposed to save, yet, this verse is not teaching that salvation itself was finalized and completed in eternity, before there was a just satisfaction by Christ to God by His obedience unto death.
True, Paul does begin the verse with salvation accomplished, but we have to remember that he is writing under the inspiration of the Spirit after Christ had already come and accomplished it. The sense of the verse then is to explain how it was that Christ saved sinners by His death. “Who hath saved us” indicates two aspects as already accomplished. First, that by His death He saved His people from the legal condemnation of the law and justice of God, Romans 5:10. Second, it is written to those whom He saved from their ignorance and rebellion against Christ and His righteousness, by the work of the Spirit in regeneration, Titus 3:5. The summary meaning of the verse is that God called them unto salvation according to His own purpose and grace. His purpose and grace were determined in Christ Jesus before the world began, but the salvation was accomplished in time through the coming, doing, dying and rising again of the Lord Jesus.
Before moving on to the matter of ‘justification by faith,’ it is important to understand that denouncing the doctrine of ‘eternal justification’ in no way diminishes the truth of God’s sovereignty and the certainty of salvation in Christ Jesus. Some might lead you to believe that by standing against ‘eternal justification,’ you are somehow dividing the Godhead or calling in question the certainty of salvation. Unlike men, what God purposed, He accomplishes.[14] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn14) Nonetheless, even God Himself, to be a just God and Savior, could not save, redeem, or justify one sinner before Christ made just payment by His death. When He cried, “It is finished,” it was the end (fulfillment) of the law for righteousness to all them that believe, Romans 10:4. In other words, those who believe see Him in His death and AT HIS DEATH as having fulfilled all the law of God, satisfying it in every jot and tittle. If it’s fulfilled, then the transaction was done, both in dealing with its precepts, but also its penalty. What God started in His eternal decree and purpose, Christ finished at the cross. What was finished? It is the redemption, justification, sanctification, adoption, pardon, peace and forgiveness of those that the Father gave Him, and He completed in His obedience unto death.[15] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn15)
Second, is the misunderstanding that it is at faith, or upon faith, that God actually justifies the elect. Those who hold this view teach that although Christ bore the sin of His elect at the cross, He does not justify them, or impute Christ’s righteousness to them until they believe. The Reformers made the expression ‘justified by faith’ the ground and pillar of their doctrine. Much of mainstream Protestantism has therefore adopted this terminology into their confessions of faith. The problem is in how most interpret this biblical phrase. There are three particular interpretations propagated, two of which are false.

1. The Reformed doctrine teaches that Christ secured the justification of the elect in His death at the cross, but that God does not impute His righteousness until those elect are brought to faith in Christ. Therefore, they teach ‘justification upon the act of faith.’ Although they do not make faith the cause of justification, they make it the condition for justification. This is the view of most ‘Calvinists.'

2. The Free-will Arminian doctrine teaches that Christ died to make salvation possible to all, and that those are justified who ‘make Jesus the Lord and Master of their lives and give Him first place in their lives. Then He is able to give them His righteousness, which makes them justified before the Father.’ This view teaches ‘justification because of faith.’

3. The Biblical doctrine teaches that when Christ died, God the Father immediately justified the elect once for all. He did not merely secure their justification. The term ‘justified by faith’ means they were justified according to ‘the law, principle or content of faith, Romans 3:28. It is also revealed in the Gospel, of which ‘faith’ is a synonym. Romans 1:17. We even use faith in this manner when we ask someone of what ‘faith’ they are. Or we may refer to ‘Articles of Faith.’ Therefore, when speaking of being justified by faith, we have to understand the Scriptural context. Even where the meaning is subjective or experiential faith, it is not the instrument of justification, but the result.

We have to then look carefully at the context to make the determination as to whether the word ‘faith’ is used in an objective sense, i.e. having Christ as its object, or subjectively- that which is revealed in the heart by the Spirit of God. For example ‘the faith which was once delivered unto the saints,’ Jude 3, is not speaking of faith by the Spirit’s regenerating work, but faith whose object is Christ, and whose substance (the Gospel) declares His blood and righteousness as the only ground of justification before God. It is the faith of God’s elect (the sum and substance of the Gospel of God’s Son) that declares sinners for whom He died justified. This is the meaning in Romans 3:28 where faith is used in opposition to the ‘law of works.’ The ‘law of faith’ is the sum of the conditions and requirements for justification fulfilled by Christ. The ‘law of works,’ which is unto condemnation in opposition to justification, is the sum of conditions and requirements that can only condemn the sinner.

There are places where the Bible uses faith also in the subjective sense, i.e. the work of grace in the heart. An example of this is in Romans 5:1.[16] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn16) However, even there, faith is not the instrument or cause of our justification, but the fruit of it. The instrument of our justification is always the righteousness of Christ, once for all established by Christ, accepted, approved and imputed to the account of all the elect of all time in His obedience unto death, Hebrews 10:10. Many interpret Romans 5:1 to mean that faith is the cause of God justifying the sinner, and thereby make justification simultaneous with faith. However, the context reveals that God conditioned the justification of the sinner entirely upon the work of Christ in His death and resurrection, NOT FAITH. “Therefore,” refers back to the preceding verse in Romans 4:25- “Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.” By putting the comma after justified rather than faith, which is how it should read, the meaning is “Therefore being, or having been declared just, (based on the redeeming work of Christ alone), by or, out of faith we have peace with God…” In other words, the peace with God, enjoyed in the sinner’s conscience, is the result of God-given faith, that sinner already having been justified by the death of Christ. The peace of God enjoyed by the justified sinner comes by God-given faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith is not the reason that God justifies the sinner; it is the result of God having justified him through the blood and righteousness of Christ. Faith is the evidence of the justification that Christ has obtained by His righteous life and death. Those whom God justified by the blood (death) of His Son, He will most certainly in time cause to believe because their sins have already been put away, and He declared them righteous at the cross, Romans 5:9. Colossians 2:13 clearly shows that the reason God regenerates sinners is not in order to justify them, but because they have been justified in Christ through His redemptive work-“And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;”

Again, some might conclude then that faith is not necessary in the grand doctrine of justification, if Christ already accomplished it at the cross. The answer is that it has no part as our ground of justification before God; however, it is clearly the EVIDENCE that God has justified that sinner in Christ by His obedience unto death.[17] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn17) In time, every justified sinner will by God’s grace and Spirit come to Christ in repentance, believing the record God has given of His Son and submitting to Christ as the end (fulfillment) of the law for righteousness.[18] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn18)

We dare not make faith the cause of justification; any more than one would make the will of man the cause of saving grace. The meaning is that in His time, all whom God has justified in Christ, through the death of His Son, He will most certainly cause to believe on Christ. If you are a believer, it is the righteousness and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ that already justifies you before God, not your faith. If my justification is in any way conditioned on or tied to my faith, what then when my faith is weak, or seems completely gone. To found justification upon even the grace of faith is to lay it on weak knees at best, and in that, there is no comfort. No! Faith is the result of the Sovereign Spirit’s work in your heart, causing you to enter into the peace, joy, and fellowship established already for you by Christ’s work at the cross. If you are His by grace, faith is the evidence of God having justified you already in Christ. When Christ cried, “It is finished,” it is!
Third, is the misunderstanding of the relationship between justification and works. Some who would link the two fall back on James 2:21-25.[19] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn19) On the surface, to some it would appear that this is speaking of our justification before God, but the Scriptures do not contradict each other. The Bible clearly states that “by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified,” Galatians 2:16. Therefore, the only conclusion we may draw is that James is writing regarding what justifies one’s faith before men. If I say that Christ’s blood and righteousness justify me, and that the Spirit of God has brought me to believe on Him in repentance and submission to His righteousness, then what is the proof? It is not merely my saying so? No! The fruit will be manifest in, my love for God in truth, but also love, compassion, and burden for the lost, ignorant and rebellious around me.[20] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn20)
JUSTIFICATION AT THE CROSS

To this point, I have endeavored to show from Scripture that any justification based on God’s eternal decree, faith, works or any combinations thereof, are not the sinner’s justification. Now, I want to draw your attention to the one ground of justification that I believe is taught in Scripture. That is the justification established by Christ, in time, through His obedience unto death, which God the Father accepted and approved, and therefore immediately and simultaneously imputed it to the account of all of God’s elect. Note the following key passages of Scripture.
1. “If there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.” Galatians 3:24. The justification of sinners from beginning to end is by the FREE grace of God, through the life and death, the ONE death, and the ONE righteousness of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, apart from any work, act of the will, or warrant in the sinner. Romans 3:24 demonstrates that God justified sinners freely, THROUGH THE REDEMPTION THAT IS IN CHRIST JESUS. Freely means, wholly conditioned upon Christ alone and His effectual life and death. To make justification dependent in any way upon the sinner’s willing, believing, or acting first is to render the death of Christ vain.
2. "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus," Romans 3:24. The word ‘freely’ in the original means ‘without cause’ and describes the character of those whom God justified for Christ’s sake, at the cross. Justification is the legal act of God whereby He declares sinners just (perfectly righteous) on account of the Lord Jesus Christ. He honored and satisfied the Law on their behalf, both in its precepts and penalty, Matthew 5:17. Having fully accomplished the work, all the blessings of forgiveness and pardon were immediately applied to the account of those for whom He finished it. In time, by His Spirit, and through the gospel, God causes all whom He has redeemed and justified in Christ to look to Christ alone as their only ground of justification. They believe on Him, and rest in His work accomplished and applied for them at the cross! Their believing is not the time of justification, but the evidence of it. Justification is in, by, and through the Lord Jesus alone, fully accomplished at the cross! Hebrews 1:3.

3. “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to His cross, ” Colossians 2:14. It is clear from this that the believer’s justification before God took place at the cross. All charges were satisfied in Christ’s death, not just dropped, set aside, or suspended. Therefore, He fully accomplished forgiveness, redemption, and justification at that time. Faith does not complete Christ’s work. Rather, it is by faith that all the redeemed embrace and do enjoy in their experience what Christ accomplished for them at the cross!

Imagine if a man could not pay the mortgage on his house and another stepped in on his behalf and paid it all off, then the bank is satisfied and holds no claim on the house. Even before the bank informs the homeowner of the satisfaction or if for a while he finds it unbelievable, that would not affect his standing with the bank. The bank cannot and will not repossess the home. The man’s peace of mind may be affected, but his house would remain paid in full because of the satisfaction by another. Even so, the peace of mind of the sinner is the result of the revelation by the Spirit of truth of what Christ accomplished, but Christ’s work on the cross is his justification. Faith does not complete Christ’s work. It is finished. If you are in Christ, by grace, through faith, what a comfort and blessing this is! It is truly the Gospel (Good News)!

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

If this were merely a matter of pitting one man’s view versus another, I would be a fool to even engage in such a debate. However, because we are dealing with the very glory and character of God, and the whole reason for the inspired Word to answer the question of how God can be just and justify sinners[21] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn21), then the matter is of utmost importance.

Why is there such debate and dissension over a matter so plain in Scripture? First, it is the very essence of God’s glory, and therefore, we can expect the battle to rage here. Second, is the pride of men, and here I must take my place as a depraved sinner before God’s Word. It is only the Spirit of God that can teach a poor sinner’s heart, and bring us to renounce any doctrine, thought, or practice that in any way detracts from the glory of the cross of the Lord Jesus. It is to the cross (not the wooden one, but the obedience unto death of Christ), to which the Spirit will always direct the heart of His elect when He teaches them.[22] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn22)

For some, there is outright rebellion against any notion of a righteousness imputed apart from works at the cross. While professing that Christ is all in salvation, redemption, justification, and glorification, they still hold to traditions, doctrines, and interpretations of men, and therefore remain blind to what the Scriptures teach. I speak from my own past experience here. Yet, when the Spirit of God is pleased to teach a sinner’s heart, and bring light to the subject, He also works repentance in the heart, giving all the glory to Christ.

Many are looking at justification from different angles. They do not see that that although there may be multifaceted sides to it, yet it still is only one object, accomplished once for all by the blood and righteousness of Christ. Take the example of an orange cone. From a distance standing up, it may appear to be a triangle. Turned over it may appear as a funnel, or on it’s side an arrow. Nevertheless, viewed properly it is still a cone, regardless of the optical illusion from a distance.

The best definition of the justification is that found in Scripture itself,

Romans 3:24 “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus”
Romans 5:9 “Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.”When the Scriptures speak of the blood of Christ, it is synonymous with His death. Note how the Scriptures tie our justification before God directly to the death of Christ and redemption in Him. Why would someone say that Christ redeemed sinners at the cross but God did not justify them there? On the other hand, to say that God justified sinners based on decree alone and not upon a finished just payment is to pervert the truth and diminish the glory of Christ in His death. To say that Christ died, and yet the benefits of His death are not actually accounted until one believes is a conditional salvation message and foreign to Scripture.

There is only one justification of sinners before God, and that accomplished by Christ in His cross death. Like the orange cone, we must not confuse the different views of justification as different types of justification or times of justification. There is but one, whether viewed from eternity, by faith, or through works. It was all accomplished at the cross. Perhaps the following summary will help in conclusion.

<LI class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Justification viewed from eternity. It is not the Lamb slain, before He was slain, but the Lamb whom God appointed to be slain, and therefore who did come as predetermined and lay down His life in sacrifice.[23] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn23) <LI class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Justification viewed by faith. It does not put any merit in faith, nor does it make faith the instrument of justification to appropriate the righteousness of God to itself. Rather, it sees that righteousness already accomplished and fulfilled in the death of the Savior and Substitute.[24] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn24) <LI class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Justification viewed through works. Our works do not justify us before God. They are rather the evidence of God having justified us already through the death of His Son, our Substitute. The subsequent works are the fruits of Christ’s righteousness imputed to His people at the cross[25] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn25)
Justification accomplished at the cross. It is the anchor that is the SOLE ground of justification before God. Any other conclusion will leave the soul afloat and tossed about by every wind of doctrine.[26] (http://www.shrevegrace.org/Justification/The%20Sinner's%20Justification%20Before%20God.htm# _ftn26)

Brandan
02-13-06, 03:16 PM
Joe, if imputation takes place in time, WHERE DOES IT TAKE PLACE? NOBODY who believes that imputation takes place in time has told me. If they say that it takes place in God's mind, and it's in time, then they place God IN TIME and make Him subject to it.

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 03:21 PM
Joe, if imputation takes place in time, WHERE DOES IT TAKE PLACE? NOBODY who believes that imputation takes place in time has told me. If they say that it takes place in God's mind, and it's in time, then they place God IN TIME and make Him subject to it.

Did you read the above article? read it because he is much better than I BK.

Brandan
02-13-06, 03:21 PM
1) Justification in Christ Alone - This is a constituting of righteousness, and it is from eternity with it in view of Christ's earthly work.

2) Justification by Faith Alone - This is a declaration to the elect of their righteousness in Christ.

3) There IS NO JUSTIFICATION BY WORKS whether it be before men, conscience, or God.

Brandan
02-13-06, 03:21 PM
Did you read the above article? read it because he is much better than I BK.
I read that article awhile back. It's very bad.

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 03:23 PM
I read that article awhile back. It's very bad.

Cmon BK. is it very bad because he disagrees with you? It is well written. Supported thouroughly with scripture.

Did you also read Samuel Trotts letter? Was that very bad too?

jmgipson
02-13-06, 03:41 PM
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:-LWPoYKhB2cJ:www.aclrc.com/images/Scales.gif (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.aclrc.com/images/Scales.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.aclrc.com/main.html&h=364&w=473&sz=6&tbnid=-LWPoYKhB2cJ:&tbnh=96&tbnw=126&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dscales%2Bof%2Bjustice%26hl%3Den%26lr% 3D&oi=imagesr&start=3)

Let us see now: John Gill - Hoeksema - G. H. Kersten Affirmative

Ken Wimer - Samuel Trotts Negative

I do like Wimers sermon on the death Chist accomplished though

John

Bob Higby
02-13-06, 03:44 PM
I apologize if I sounded condemnatory Joe.

We do not deny justification or imputation at the cross at all--in fact the whole point of this thread is that IN TIME the cross is the primary moment of imputation. But we certainly deny that it is ONLY to be understood as happening at the moment of the cross. I do not believe that your interpretation of Rom. 8:29,30 will hold up; the context is the realm transcendent of time/space wherein God foreknew and predestined. In that realm he also justified us, conformed us to His Son's image, and glorified us!

OK. I think I have it now. Original sin does not refer to the first sin but to the result of that first sin. The Scriptures speak repeatedly of sin and death entering the world through “one man’s transgression.” As a result of Adam’s sin, all men are now sinners. This is what Hoeksema is speaking of then. I have heard we were imputed with Adams sin so much I never thought what really was being said there. If this is wrong someone please send me in the right direction.

Not all of us here believe in the immediate imputation of Adam's sin to all of humanity (both elect and non-elect); I, for one, do not hold to THAT view of original sin. It is true that sin and death entered the world through the transgression of one man, however, for me that simply indicates Adam in his rebellion REPRESENTED what all of us are predestined by God to do individually. For those who believe in creationalism, not traducianism--rebellion and sin originate in each soul individually at the time each soul is created; original sin is not passed down biologically from Adam.

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 03:46 PM
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:-LWPoYKhB2cJ:www.aclrc.com/images/Scales.gif (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.aclrc.com/images/Scales.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.aclrc.com/main.html&h=364&w=473&sz=6&tbnid=-LWPoYKhB2cJ:&tbnh=96&tbnw=126&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dscales%2Bof%2Bjustice%26hl%3Den%26lr% 3D&oi=imagesr&start=3)

Let us see now: John Gill - Hoeksema - G. H. Kersten Affirmative

Ken Wimer - Samuel Trotts Negative

I do like Wimers sermon on the death Chist accomplished though

John

Funny John. Guard those scales, Brandan is going to stuff the ballot box. I want a recount!!!!!!!!!

jmgipson
02-13-06, 03:55 PM
Not all of us here believe in the immediate imputation of Adam's sin to all of humanity (both elect and non-elect); I, for one, do not hold to THAT view of original sin. It is true that sin and death entered the world through the transgression of one man, however, for me that simply indicates Adam in his rebellion REPRESENTED what all of us are predestined by God to do individually. For those who believe in creationalism, not traducianism--rebellion and sin originate in each soul individually at the time each soul is created; original sin is not passed down biologically from Adam.

Bob,
Is this inline with what Luther speaks of as the soul being created from a seed that had been corrupted by the sin of the one man Adam. (Bondage of the will)

John

Tobias Crisp
02-13-06, 04:01 PM
So far my take on justification:


before faith1) in the decree of God in eternity;
2) in the resurrection of Christ


by faith1) actual justification, which takes place in regeneration, in which faith is wrought in the soul as a living plant of the Holy Spirit, in which the elect is justified on the side of God and is placed in a state of reconciliation with God;

2) passive justification, in the tribunal of conscience, when the Holy Spirit gives the assurance of justification before God in Christ.


Finally, the elect shall be justified at the second coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven, when the wicked shall be condemned, but they in their resurrection shall be declared righteous, and shall inherit the kingdom prepared for them before the foundation of the world. (kersten)
Sound good.John, if I am understanding you correctly, then this is essentially what I hold to except that I would add between 1 and 2 that Christ accomplished the work of righteousness in his obedient life and atoning death in satisfying God's law and justice.

~Anthony

Whammer
02-13-06, 04:13 PM
This has been a great thread for me, I had never heard the term "Eternal Justification" until I found the "5 Solas" and "Pristine Grace" websites and started reading things there. Alot of people have brought alot of scripture to bear on this subject in this thread and I thought I would add just a little, and it follows a pattern of thought from Jesus in Luke 14:28-30.......For which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost, whether he has enough to complete it? Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, saying, 'This man began to build and was not able to finish.'

and also...According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building upon it. Let each one take care how he builds upon it. For no one can lay a "foundation" other that that which is laid, Which is Jesus Christ .....1 Cor. 3: 10-11

and Heb. 3:4.....For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.......

I think every one of God's elect agrees that God is "The Builder of builders", and so it makes sense that before God laid the foundation of the world he would have a plan..a "blueprint so to speak"......He would know that he had enough wisdom to construct what He had in mind, He would also know that He had the power to pull it off........He is the wise master builder (I think Ray alluded to this in an earlier post and it was sort of set aside)

Isaiah 46:9-11 ...remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose, calling a bird of prey from the east, the man of my counsel from a far country. .......I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass; I have purposed, and I will do it........

I just dont think it gets much clearer........the things not yet done (in time) are still called "things", so in eternity....in Gods mind...they already are the way they are........the fact that I am writing this at this moment is no surprise to the "One who purposed it".
Some one else mentioned in a previous post that we arent in a replay.....I beg to differ......the actual building does not look any different than the plans, and since the plans exist in God's mind in eternity....how could it be any other way now......How could he declare there was an end to anything with any certainty if He was not who He is.....God Almighty......I think I understand why Bob's post is "hard", it is because a misunderstanding of this doctrine strikes at the heart of Who God really is...it seems to call into question His wisdom and His power.

Somewhere in an earlier post another comment was made to this effect that Election doesnt = Justification
I agree that the terms are exclusive but justification flows out of election and they cant be seperated......I see this in Ro. 9:11 as well in the phrase ..."in order that God's purpose of election might continue" in the whole context of the letter to the romans about justification. (among other subjects too, so I am not speaking to their exclusion)

So when I came across that passage in Eph. 1:1-11, and I see the use of the words "purpose" and "counsel", same uses as the Holy Spirit said in Isaiah 46:9-11 and that they are the same "eternal" things mentioned, I can come to no other conclusion, our justification is eternal because God is eternal and his plans are eternal.......so to Lion of Judah and Harald.....I dont see anyone here denying the importance and necessity of what was accomplished at the Cross......and I could be wrong here, but it seems to me (may I be so bold as a newcomer, and one who has only read about 1000 posts in the archives.......I hope I am not out of place) that you guys may overemphasize what happens in the "fullness of time" over the "Plan" itself (I am still thinking in Eph 1, specifically Eph 1:10)........maybe like saying.....the plan was just a plan......God is the only being I know who can speak his thoughts into being, never the less his thoughts are the "live action".......:D

I hope I have not muddied the water here, but added a little to the edification I have already myself received in this thread.
I wish I lived closer to a few of you, I dont know any "hypers" out this way in Idaho, just Baal worshippers for the most part :) :rolleyes:

Okay, so I've opened myself up to the forum here in this post, I am looking forward to getting to know ALL of you!

Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you. Eph. 4:32

jmgipson
02-13-06, 04:22 PM
Whammer,
A lot of spuds too. :p

I personally think you expounded the total of this thread rather well.

John

Brandan
02-13-06, 04:36 PM
I hereby declare Whammer's post to be the post of the day!

Brandan
02-13-06, 04:44 PM
I also notice this is Whammer's first post. That was one of the best first posts on this forum that I have ever seen. Amen! Welcome to the board Bryan!

ray kikkert
02-13-06, 04:59 PM
Ok Ray: Here it goes. Where did Elijah go?

First and foremost, The account of Elijah writing a letter to Jehorom recorded in 2 Chronicles 21:12-15 shows the Elijah was transported "Some where else" in the whirlwind. Scriptures speak of 3 heavens. 1) The Heaven of Gods throne( 2 Corinthians 12:2, 2) Genesis 22:17 "I will multiply your seed as the stars of the heaven . . . " This is outer space per se, where the stars and planets are, 3) Jeremiah 4:25 " . . . and all the birds of the heavens were fled." This is our atmosphere. This is where Elijah was seen traveling. And obviously somewhere else on the earth. Exactly like the account of Steven in Acts. The SPirit took him to some other place.

Okay Joe next in order here is Stephen. You claim Stephen did not go to heaven but is "some other place" and "traveling" and "in our atmosphere".

Joe , you have been watching too many movies.

Acts 8: "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God. And said, Behold , I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God" 55-56

"And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep." 59-60.

Joe, Stephen's soul is not floating around the earth. In the intermediate state his soul is with the Lord Jesus Christ in heaven right now. His soul is not somewhere else.

When our Saviour returns, his soul will be joined with the glorious resurrected body the Lord will give him.

John Calvin states thus:

He saw the glory of God. Luke signifieth, as I have said, that Christ appeared forthwith to Stephen so soon as he lifted up his eyes towards heaven. But he telleth us before, that he had other eyes given him than the fleshly eyes, seeing that with the same 3 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xii.htm#_fnf3) he flieth up unto the glory of God. Whence we must gather a general comfort, that God will be no less present with us, if, forsaking the world, all our senses strive to come to him; not that he appeareth unto us by any external vision, as he did to Stephen, but he will so reveal himself unto us within, that we may indeed feel his presence. And this manner of seeing ought to be sufficient for us, when God doth not only, by his power and grace, declare that he is nigh at hand, but doth also prove that he dwelleth in us.
56. Behold, I see the heavens. God meant not only privately to provide for his servant, but also to wring and torment his enemies; as Stephen doth courageously triumph over them, when he affirmeth plainly that he saw a miracle. And here may a question be moved, how the heavens were opened? For mine own part, I think that there was nothing changed in the nature of the heavens; but that Stephen had new quickness of sight granted him, which pierced through all lets, even unto the invisible glory of the kingdom of heaven. For admit we grant that there was some division or parting 4 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xii.htm#_fnf4) made in heaven, yet man's eye could never reach so far. Again, Stephen alone did see the glory of God. For that spectacle was not only hid from the wicked, who stood in the same place, but they were also so blinded within themselves, that they did not see the manifest truth. 5 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xii.htm#_fnf5) Therefore, he saith that the heavens are opened to him in this respect, because nothing keepeth him from beholding the glory of God. Whereupon it followeth that the miracle was not wrought in heaven, but in his eyes. Wherefore, there is no cause why we should dispute long about any natural vision; because it is certain that Christ appeared unto him not after some natural manner, but after a new and singular sort. And I pray you of what color was the glory of God, that it could be seen naturally with the eyes of the flesh? Therefore, we must imagine nothing in this vision but that which is divine. Moreover, this is worth the noting, that the glory of God appeared not unto Stephen wholly as it was, but according to man's capacity. For that infiniteness cannot be comprehended with the measure of any creature.
The Son of man standing. He seeth Christ reigning in that flesh wherein he was abased; so that in very deed the victory did consist in this one thing. Therefore, it is not superfluous in that Christ appeareth unto him, and for this cause doth he also call him the Son of man, as if he should say, I see that man whom ye thought ye had quite extinguished by death enjoying the government of heaven; therefore, gnash with your teeth as much as you list: there is no cause why I should fear to fight for him even unto blood, who shall not only defend his own cause, but my salvation also. Notwithstanding, here may a question be moved, why he saw him standing, who is said elsewhere to sit? Augustine, as he is sometimes more subtle than needs, saith, "that he sitteth as a judge, that he stood then as an advocate." For mine own part, I think that though these speeches be diverse, yet they signify both one thing. For neither sitting, nor yet standing, noteth out how the body of Christ was framed; but this is referred unto his power and kingdom. For where shall we erect him a throne, that he may sit at the right hand of God the Father, seeing God doth fill all things in such sort, that we ought to imagine no place for his right hand?
Therefore, the whole text is a metaphor, when Christ is said to sit or stand at the right hand of God the Father, and the plain meaning is this, that Christ hath all power given him, that he may reign in his Father's stead in that flesh wherein he was humbled, and that he may be next him. And although this power be spread abroad through heaven and earth, yet some men imagine amiss that Christ in every where in his human nature. For, though he be contained in a certain place, yet that hindereth no whit but that he may and doth show forth his power throughout all the world. Therefore, if we be desirous to feel him present by the working of his grace, we must seek him in heaven; as he revealed himself unto Stephen there. Also, some men do affirm ridiculously out of this place, that he drew near unto Stephen that he might see him. 6 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xii.htm#_fnf6) For we have already said, that Stephen's eyes were so lifted up by the power of the Spirit, 7 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xii.htm#_fnf7) that no distance of place could hinder the same. I confess, indeed, that speaking properly, that is, philosophically, there is no place above the heavens. But this is sufficient for me, that it is perverse doting to place Christ any where else save only in heaven, and above the elements of the world.

..... and further....

59. Calling on. Because he had uttered words enough before men, though in vain, he turneth himself now unto God for good causes, and armeth himself with prayer to suffer all things. For although we have need to run unto God's help every minute of an hour during our whole warfare, yet we have greatest need to call upon God in the last conflict, which is the hardest.
And Luke expresseth again how furious mad they were, because their cruelty was not assuaged even when they saw the servant of Christ praying humbly. Furthermore, here is set down a prayer of Stephen having two members. In the former member, where he commendeth his spirit to Christ, he showeth the constancy of his faith. In the other, where he prayeth for his enemies, he testifieth his love towards men. Forasmuch as the whole perfection of godliness consisteth upon [of] these two parts, we have in the death of Stephen a rare example of a godly and holy death. It is to be thought that he used many more words, but the sum tendeth to this end.
Lord Jesus. I have already said, that this prayer was a witness of confidence; and surely the courageousness and violentness 3 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xiii.htm#_fnf3) of Stephen was great, that when as he saw the stones fly about his ears, wherewith he should be stoned by and by; when as he heareth cruel curses and reproaches against his head, he yet stayeth himself meekly 4 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xiii.htm#_fnf4) upon the grace of Christ. In like sort, the Lord will have his servants to be brought to nought as it were sometimes, to the end their salvation may be the more wonderful, And let us define this salvation not by the understanding of our flesh, 5 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xiii.htm#_fnf5) but by faith. We see how Stephen leaneth not unto the judgment of the flesh, but rather assuring himself, even in very destruction, that he shall be saved, he suffereth death with a quiet mind. For undoubtedly he was assured of this, that our life is hid with Christ in God, (Colossians 3:3 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Colossians+3:3,).)
Therefore, casting off all care of the body, he is content to commit his soul into the hands of Christ. For he could not pray thus from his heart, unless, having forgotten this life, he had cast off all care of the same.
It behoveth us with David (Psalm 31:6 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Psalms+31:6,)) to commit our souls into the hands of God daily so long as we are in the world, because we are environed with a thousand deaths, that God may deliver our life from all dangers; but when we must die indeed, and we are called thereunto, we must fly unto this prayer, that Christ will receive our spirit. For he commended his own spirit into the hands of his Father, to this end, that he may keep ours for ever. This is an inestimable comfort, in that we know our souls do not wander up and down 6 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xiii.htm#_fnf6) when they flit out of our bodies, but that Christ receiveth them, that he may keep them faithfully, if we commend them into his hands. This hope ought to encourage us to suffer death patiently. Yea, whosoever commendeth his soul to Christ with an earnest affection of faith, he must needs resign himself wholly to his pleasure and will. And this place doth plainly testify that the soul of man is no vain blast which vanisheth away, as some frantic fellows imagine dotingly, 7 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xiii.htm#_fnf7) but that it is an essential spirit which liveth after this life. Furthermore, we are taught hereby that we call upon Christ rightly and lawfully, because all power is given him of the Father, for this cause, that all men may commit themselves to his tuition. 8 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xiii.htm#_fnf8)
60. Kneeling down, he cried. This is the other part of his prayer, wherein he joineth the love of men with faith in Christ; and surely if we desire to be gathered to Christ for our salvation, we must put on this affection. Whereas Stephen prayeth for his enemies, and those most deadly, and even in the very instant when their cruelty might provoke him unto desire of revenge, he declareth sufficiently what affection he beareth toward all other men.
And we know that we are all commanded 9 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xiii.htm#_fnf9) to do the same which Stephen did; 10 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xiii.htm#_fnf10) but because there is nothing more hard than so to forgive injuries, that we will wish well to those who would have us undone, (Matthew 5:43, 44 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Matthew+5:43,Matthew+5:44,);) therefore we must always set Stephen before our eyes for an example. He crieth indeed with a loud voice, but he maketh show of nothing before men which was not spoken sincerely and from the heart, as God himself doth witness. Yet he crieth aloud, that he may omit nothing which might serve to assuage the cruelty of the enemies. The fruit appeared not forthwith, yet undoubtedly he prayed not in vain; and Paul is unto us a sufficient testimony 11 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/xiv.xiii.htm#_fnf11) that this sin was not laid to all their charges. I will not say as Augustine, that unless Stephen had prayed the Church should not have had Paul; for this is somewhat hard; only I say this, that whereas God pardoned Paul, it appeareth thereby that Stephen's prayer was not in vain. Here ariseth a question, how Stephen prayeth for those which he said of late did resist the Holy Ghost; but this seemeth to be the sin against the Spirit which shall never be forgiven? We may easily answer, that that is pronounced generally of all which belongeth to many everywhere; therefore, he called not the body of the people rebellious in such sort that he exempted none. Again, I have declared before what manner of resisting he condemned in that place; for it followeth not by and by, that they sin against the Holy Ghost who resist him for a time. When he prayeth that God will not lay the sin to their charge, his meaning is, that the guiltiness may not remain in them.
And when he had said thus, he fell on sleep. This was added, that we may know that these words were uttered even when he was ready to yield up the ghost, which is a token of wonderful constancy; also this word sleep noteth a meek kind of death. Now, because he made this prayer when he was at the point of death, he was not moved with any hope of obtaining pardon, to be so careful to appease his enemies, but only that they might repent. When this word sleep is taken in the Scripture for to die, it must be referred unto the body, lest any man imagine foolishly with unlearned men, that the souls do also sleep.

Brandan
02-13-06, 05:00 PM
It is true that sin and death entered the world through the transgression of one man, however, for me that simply indicates Adam in his rebellion REPRESENTED what all of us are predestined by God to do individually.For clarification, I think Bob means, and it is what I believe that "us" means the elect and not all men universally.


For those who believe in creationalism, not traducianism--rebellion and sin originate in each soul individually at the time each soul is created; original sin is not passed down biologically from Adam.Amen! If it were to be passed biologically, then what is the DNA structure? I think traducianism is pure mysticism for there is no logical explanation for it. It was the position of Luther and many of the reformers. If we're gonna discuss this, we'll have to create another thread though. If someone wants to comment, feel free to start a new thread.

beloved57
02-13-06, 05:20 PM
The article by John hupton is classic ! It was a blessing to read.....

jmgipson
02-13-06, 05:25 PM
John, if I am understanding you correctly, then this is essentially what I hold to except that I would add between 1 and 2 that Christ accomplished the work of righteousness in his obedient life and atoning death in satisfying God's law and justice.

~Anthony

So far my take on justification:

before faith1) in the decree of God in eternity;

2)Christ accomplished the work of righteousness in his obedient life and atoning death in satisfying God's law and justice

3)in the resurrection of Christ

by faith1) actual justification, which takes place in regeneration, in which faith is wrought in the soul as a living plant of the Holy Spirit, in which the elect is justified on the side of God and is placed in a state of reconciliation with God;

2) passive justification, in the tribunal of conscience, when the Holy Spirit gives the assurance of justification before God in Christ.

Finally, the elect shall be justified at the second coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven, when the wicked shall be condemned, but they in their resurrection shall be declared righteous, and shall inherit the kingdom prepared for them before the foundation of the world. (kersten)Thanks Anthony

lionovjudah
02-13-06, 05:57 PM
Okay Joe next in order here is Stephen. You claim Stephen did not go to heaven but is "some other place" and "traveling" and "in our atmosphere".

Joe , you have been watching too many movies.

Acts 8: "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God. And said, Behold , I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God" 55-56

"And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep." 59-60.

Joe, Stephen's soul is not floating around the earth. In the intermediate state his soul is with the Lord Jesus Christ in heaven right now. His soul is not somewhere else.





Ray, this is not the scripture!!!!!!!!

I made a mistake!!!! I meant Philip.

Act 8:39 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Act/Act008.html#39) And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

Act 8:40 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Act/Act008.html#40) But Philip was found at Azotus: and passing through he preached in all the cities, till he came to Caesarea.


This is exactly what happened to Elijah

ray kikkert
02-13-06, 08:02 PM
Ray, this is not the scripture!!!!!!!!

I made a mistake!!!! I meant Philip.

Act 8:39 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Act/Act008.html#39) And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

Act 8:40 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Act/Act008.html#40) But Philip was found at Azotus: and passing through he preached in all the cities, till he came to Caesarea.


This is exactly what happened to Elijah

Seriously Joe , between Stephen and Philip??

Anyways I do admit and have no problem with the idea that Philip as Elijah had been caught up by the Spirit of the Lord and found to be at another place.

This is not the argument.

You are saying that in the account of 2 Kings 2 that Elijah did NOT go to heaven , but rather was caught up in the Spirit again.

That is not what the text says and you can verify that by seeing how Scripture states that Elijah in 2 Kings 2 where it says he went to heaven and not simply caught up by the Spirit to somewhere else on earth.

Elisha had asked for a double portion of the Spirit and also Elijah's mantle was no longer needed and was now Elisha's .

There is a distinction here you do not want to see. It is there nonetheless.

Brandan
02-13-06, 08:08 PM
Bro. Ray, you continue to impress me with your perseverence and continuing stand for the truth. No matter how strange the argument is, you continue refute and refute! Thanks!

ray kikkert
02-13-06, 08:18 PM
And again look at John 3:13 " And no man has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of man who is in heaven. "

And Acts 2;34 " For David did not ascend into the heavens but he said himself: 'The Lord said to My Lord, 'Sit at My right hand, till I make your enemies Your footstool.' "

Why would Peter say this inspired word? David is not in Heaven with Christ at the throne of God yet When he died.

BAck to the letter.

Joe in taking a look at these texts, you have prostituted them to say something they do not.

In no wise are both of these text to be used to defend the position that old testament souls are NOT in heaven, but rather floating around somewhere.

These texts have more to do with saying that only our Saviour , very God and very man is able to wrought salvation for God's elect. No mere man, even David is able to do so only Christ was able to attain salvation for the elect creation of the Lord.

This is grasping straws and the exegesis of Harold Kamping.

LOL, maybe the Lord has outfitted David with an UFO?? That sure would solve alot of mystery wouldn't it??

We are not alone:eek:

Calvins comments on Acts 2:34:

34. For doubtless David. Although they might easily gather by the very effect which they saw with their eyes, that the principality was granted and given to Christ, yet to the end his glory may carry the greater credit, he proveth, by David his testimony, that it was so appointed in times past by God, that Christ should be lifted up unto the highest degree of honor. For these words, to "sit at the right hand of God," import as much as to bear the chief rule, as we shall afterward more at large declare. Yet before he reciteth the prophecy, he saith that it agreeth only to Christ. Therefore, to the end the sense may be more manifest, the sentence must thus run. David pronounceth that it was decreed by God that a king should sit at his right hand. But this doth not appertain unto David, who was never extolled unto so great dignity. Therefore lie speaketh this of Christ. Furthermore, that ought to have seemed no strange thing unto the Jews which was foretold by the oracle of the Holy Ghost. Hereby it appeareth in what sense Peter denieth that David ascended into heaven. He intreateth not in this place of the soul of David, whether it were received into blessed rest, and the heavenly dwelling or no; but the ascending into heaven comprehendeth under it those things which Paul teacheth in the Epistle to the Ephesians, (Ephesians 4:9 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Ephesians+4:9,)), where he placeth Christ above all heavens, that he may fulfill all things. Wherefore the disputation concerning the estate of the dead is altogether superfluous in this place. For Peter goeth about to prove no other thing but this, that the prophecy concerning the sitting at the right hand of God was not fulfilled in David, and that, therefore, the truth thereof must be sought elsewhere. And forasmuch as it can be found nowhere else save only in Jesus Christ, it resteth that the Jews 2 (http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol36/htm/ix.vi.htm#_fnf2) do know that that is showed to them in Christ which was foretold them so long before. That is true, indeed, that David reigned, God being the author hereof, and, in some respect, he was God's vicegerent; yet not so that he might be above all creatures. Wherefore, this sitting agreeth to none, unless he excel and be above all the whole world.

ray kikkert
02-13-06, 08:54 PM
Bro. Ray, you continue to impress me with your perseverence and continuing stand for the truth. No matter how strange the argument is, you continue refute and refute! Thanks!

Brandan, the ability of the forum to underline and redirect straightway the Scripture texts used in the posts is an awesome idea.


Thank you:)

Brandan
02-13-06, 09:05 PM
Brandan, the ability of the forum to underline and redirect straightway the Scripture texts used in the posts is an awesome idea.


Thank you:)
In the future, it will link to this site instead of Bible Gateway. I just have to program my bible software to handle it. :)

Bob Higby
02-13-06, 09:31 PM
Is this inline with what Luther speaks of as the soul being created from a seed that had been corrupted by the sin of the one man Adam. (Bondage of the will)

My position is not in line with Augustine, Luther, or Calvin on this one. Brandan is also correct; I meant to refer to the elect only when I stated that Adam represented US in his rebellion and sin; Christ reversed the sin of Adam (elect mankind) in his atonement and that ONLY for elect mankind!

It was Tertullian, to my knowledge, who attempted to marry the traducian philosophy of the origin of the soul with Christendumb. He succeeded! Yes, this is a topic for another thread as it is off topic for this one!

lionovjudah
02-14-06, 05:35 AM
Seriously Joe , between Stephen and Philip??

Anyways I do admit and have no problem with the idea that Philip as Elijah had been caught up by the Spirit of the Lord and found to be at another place.

This is not the argument.

You are saying that in the account of 2 Kings 2 that Elijah did NOT go to heaven , but rather was caught up in the Spirit again.

That is not what the text says and you can verify that by seeing how Scripture states that Elijah in 2 Kings 2 where it says he went to heaven and not simply caught up by the Spirit to somewhere else on earth.

Elisha had asked for a double portion of the Spirit and also Elijah's mantle was no longer needed and was now Elisha's .

There is a distinction here you do not want to see. It is there nonetheless.

Since you fail to diligently accept this, there is no more I can do Ray. I have shown where the WORD speaks of 3 heavens. I have shown where a letter from Elijah was written to the King after he died, and yet you continue to strive. I am not the one grasping here. I am stating what scripture says, you are stating what the infallible Gill and calvin says. IT must be easy to have faith by proxy. And it is commended here.. That is the rub!!!!

There is no caught up again. This is the only acount here. Then Elijah died. His body rotting in the grave. Resting in Shoel waiting for the blessed promise of the Resurrection to life.

What is meant by the bodies coming out of the graves after the death of our Lord? Is this only a metaphor? AS Wimer stated in his article, the decree was ratified at the cross. This led the captives home to be with out Lord. IT was finished.

I know it is hard to change your mind on a belief, I have yet to see you do so. IT is hard for me also. IF the Lord sees fit, then He will change either of us, and if I am wrong on this, I repent and ask to be given the wisdom to know.

JPK

lionovjudah
02-14-06, 08:17 AM
Brandan, when did your view change on this subject? Here are some quotes form you in the past:

Justification in Time - This took place at the cross. This moment in time was the climax in the justification of God's people. Justification was constituted at this event, and it is this event which all true believers look to for their justification. All Christians, when asked when they were justified will always point to the work of Christ on the cross (SOLO CHRISTO). Yes there is an aspect to justification that in my opinion takes place in eternity, BUT the Scripture almost universally speaks of Justification in time and this should be our emphasis as well. Further, without the cross there is no Justification. This aspect of Justification must be our focus. We would be biblical to refer to justification in the SIGHT of God as Christ's work on the cross. This is the Gospel.



I think the belief in eternal justification is not mandatory. This is secondary doctrine in my opinion and while I hold to it (it is mostly implicit), I do not look down upon those who disagree with me.



Concerning justification by Christ on the cross - I think this is the essential doctrine - it is the Gospel. The doctrine of Christ saving His people from their sins is believed by all regenerate individuals.


These quotes are form 5 years ago. You also agreed this was not explicitly taught in scripture. But found by using reason and logic. This has not changed. The word has not changed, so why have you changed?

You were spot on 5 years ago, and now treading some waters not spoken about for 1600 years. Not mentioned by Paul. Really not mentioned anywhere in the writ.

I have an answer why. To pursue this doctrine so zealously even when scripture doesnt, comes from having a list of all supposedly "High Calvinist" "High Grace" beliefs and then finding away to agree with them. IF it means going beyond what is written, then so be it. If it means putting yourself in a box with 10 people in all of Christiandomb, so be it. There is great satisfaction finding the great pearl, the hidden treasure. All self congratualtory satisfaction, but satisfaction non the less. To be against the majority, to be a non comformist allows one to become the scientist who discovers a cure. You(plural for those who do this with scripture) become the Jonas Salk of theology. I commend you for this, but remember this, when then lady found the lost coin, she STOPPED looking. Once you have been brought to a truth witnessed, testified by the writ, given to you by the Holy Spirit. you found the lost coin. Stop looking. You should have stopped looking 5 years ago. I mean no disresect here BK. But I will predict that 5 years from now, you will have gone farther than some of the things you "logically" believe are implicitly taught. Because EJ/EI will not be enough.

Brandan
02-14-06, 08:32 AM
My position has not changed Joe. I still believe that justification at the cross is our emphasis. However, God's view of the cross is from eternity. It is not from some point in time.

lionovjudah
02-14-06, 08:54 AM
My position has not changed Joe. I still believe that justification at the cross is our emphasis. However, God's view of the cross is from eternity. It is not from some point in time.

You could have fooled me and anyone else reading this. You staed 5 years ago what I posted, look at what you have written in this thread.

Saint Nicholas
02-14-06, 09:47 AM
At the present time, that I am writing in this post, there has been 4,974 views, and 331 replies. If we take into account, that at bare minimum, 1,000 of the views are from the 331 that have replied, that leaves us with 3,974 viewers.

My question is this. For those of you, who have viewed this topic, whether you may be a, PASTOR, DEACON, ELDER, PRIEST, OR PEWARMER, why have you not posted your thoughts on this matter?

What is it that you FEAR ? Perhaps you may get in trouble from your denomination? or, are you afraid of getting de-frocked ? Lose your Salary? Jeapordize your reputation? What is it with you people? Be a Man, step up to the plate!

Nicholas

ray kikkert
02-14-06, 11:36 AM
Since you fail to diligently accept this, there is no more I can do Ray.

There are 2 views here Joe. Either the old testament saints souls like Elijah are flying or floating about in the universe and earth. Or in fact their souls in the intermediate state are with the Triune God in heaven.

That is why I remain unconvinced of your view. It is a novel one. It is foreign to what the Scriptures state about "going to heaven".


I have shown where the WORD speaks of 3 heavens.

Yet the texts you bring to bear in no way validate that Elijah or any other saints souls are floating about in the universe. Old testament souls are in heaven.



I have shown where a letter from Elijah was written to the King after he died, and yet you continue to strive. I am not the one grasping here. I am stating what scripture says, you are stating what the infallible Gill and calvin says. IT must be easy to have faith by proxy. And it is commended here.. That is the rub!!!!

The chronological spread is a 7 year difference and is by no means exact. I seem to remember you stating it was maybe 10 years. Thus it is easy to justify that Elijah wrote the letter before being taken to heaven. King Jehoram was 32 years old when he began to reign and he reigned in Jerusalem for 8 years. He married King Ahab's daughter. Much time for Elijah to be given the word of the Lord to pronounce to king Jehoram.

I too Joe read the Scriptures. But to protect myself from such novel ideas as you represent. I am apt to be taught by those who have commented before hand who have credibility of being truthful in exegesis and the text. They are by no means perfect, yet in the multitude of counsel , thoughts are established.



There is no caught up again. This is the only acount here.

Joe , please make up your mind.

You stated before hand that Elijah had before being caught up by the Spirit and brought elsewhere. You used this defend the idea that Elijah is floating about. We have 2 accounts to this , one of concern from Obadiah 1 Kings 18:12 and from the account of the 2 Kings 2:16.


Then Elijah died. His body rotting in the grave. Resting in Shoel waiting for the blessed promise of the Resurrection to life.

Joe, please make up your mind. Either Elijah is floating about or having a nap. What will it be?? Neither I say. Elijah's soul is in heaven. You say that Elijah died. that is not what the account of Scripture states.

I also have the account of Christ's transfiguration to deal with as well. Something you have quietly left out of this discussion.

John Gill's exposition:

Matthew 17:2 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Matthew/17.html#2)

Ver. 2. And was transfigured before them,.... Peter, James, and John, before whom he was metamorphosed, or changed into another form; for not the substance of his body was changed, nor even the shape of it altered, only it received a more glorious form; that whereas before he appeared in the form of a servant, and looked mean and despicable, now he appeared in the form and majesty of God; or there was a divine glory; which from his deity showed itself in a visible manner through his flesh:

and his face did shine as the sun it had still the same appearance of an human face, but had such a dazzling glory upon it, as equalled the sun shining in its full strength:

and his raiment was white as the light: he did not put off his clothes, nor were the nature and substance, and fashion of them changed; but such rays of glory darted through his flesh, and through his clothes, as made them as bright and shining, as the light of the sun at noon day. Mark says, they became "exceeding white as snow, so as no fuller on earth can white them". The Vulgate Latin reads, "as snow", here; and so do the Ethiopic version, and Munster's Hebrew Gospel. Snow has a peculiar whiteness in it, and is therefore made use of, to express the glittering brightness of Christ's raiment; and the fuller is mentioned, who by the Jews {a} is called obwk, and means one that whitens wool, or raiment, and such an one is here designed: not that any fuller makes garments of another colour white; for though this may be done, it is not the work of fullers, but dyers: but fullers, whatever colour garments are of, if sullied and spotted, can restore them to their native colour; and if white, can bring them to their former whiteness: now Christ's garments were as white, yea, whiter, than any such men could possibly make garments, that were white at first: what colour Christ's garments were of before, is not certain; now they appeared white, to the greatest degree of whiteness. Dr. Hammond {b} has a conjecture, that in the phrase "on earth", reference is had to the earth fullers make use of in cleaning, and which is called "fullers' earth"; and that the words are to be rendered, "as no fuller, by or with earth can white them"; but if this will not bear, the sense is, that there is no fuller, nor ever was, or ever will be upon earth, that can make raiment so white as Christ's was.

{a} Maimon. in Misn. Bava Kama, c. 10. sect. 10, {b} In Mark ix. 3.


Matthew 17:3 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Matthew/17.html#3)

Ver. 3. And behold there appeared unto them,.... The disciples:

Moses and Elias; Moses the giver of the law, and Elias one of the chief of the prophets: one of them had been dead near a thousand and five hundred years, and the other had been caught up to heaven, about nine hundred years before this. The Jews sometimes speak of these two as together. They say {c},

"that the Shekinah never descends below, but whylaw hvm, "Moses and Elias" ascend above.''

Yea, they expect that these two will come together in future time; for so they represent {d} a God saying to Moses;

"Moses, as thou hast given thy life for them (the Israelites) in this world, so in time to come (the days of the Messiah) when I shall bring Elias the prophet, txak
Nyab Mkynv, "you two shall come together".''

Now they came. Luke says, they appeared "in glory": in glorious bodies, in a glory upon their bodies; like, though inferior, to the glorious body of Christ, now transfigured: that they appeared in their own real bodies, no doubt need be made; about the body of Elijah, or Elias, there is no difficulty; since he was carried soul and body to heaven, he died not, but was changed; and has ever since remained in a glorious body, in which he doubtless now appeared: and why this should not be the case of Moses, or why he should appear in another body, and not his own, I see not; for though he died, yet he was buried by the Lord, and no man ever knew the place of his sepulchre; and there was a dispute about his body, between Michael and the devil, all which are uncommon circumstances: so that it might be, that his body was, quickly after his death, raised and restored to him; or at this time, as a pledge of the resurrection of the dead, as Christ's transfiguration was of his glory. The Jews have a notion that Moses is not dead, but is ascended, and stands and ministers to God, in the highest heavens {e}: the appearance of these two with Christ, was to show, that Christ is the end of the law and prophets; that there is an entire agreement between him and them, and that they have their full accomplishment in him; and also shows, that he was neither Elias, nor any of the prophets, as some took him to be; since he was distinct from them, and the chief and more glorious than any of them. If it should be asked; how came the disciples to know these two to be Moses and Elias, since they never saw them before, nor could have any statues or pictures of them, these being not allowed among the Jews; nor do the accounts of them in Scripture seem to be sufficient to direct them to such a thought; especially, since by their glorification, they must be greatly altered: it may be replied, they knew them, either by immediate divine revelation, or by the discourse that passed between them and Christ; for it follows,

talking with him. The Jews often speak of the appearance of Elias to their doctors, and of his conversing with them, and teaching them. Whether this is done with design to lessen the glory of this appearance, I will not say; however, they cannot reasonably object to the probability of this account, since they make it to be so frequent among themselves; though they look upon it as an high favour, and that such are holy good men, that are indulged with it, take an instance or two: thus they say {f} of a certain person,

"Lo! the pious man, whom Elias used hydhb yetvm, "to converse with".''

And elsewhere it is said {g},

"R. Phineas and R. Mari, the sons of R. Chasda, were godly men, Mhme rbdm whylaw, "and Elias was talking with them", and they were priests.''

What Moses and Elias were talking with our Lord about, is expressed by Luke, See Gill on "Lu 9:31".

{c} T. Bab. Succab, fol. 5. 1. {d} Debarim Rabba, sect. 3. fol. 239. 2. {e} T. Bab. Sota, fol. 13. 2. Maimon. praefat. ad Seder Zeraim in Talmud. fol. 86. 4. {f} T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 7. 2. {g} Juchasin, fol. 101. 1. Vid. fol. 79. 1. & 118. 2. & 13. 132. 1. & T. Bab. Cetubot, fol. 106. 1.




What is meant by the bodies coming out of the graves after the death of our Lord? Is this only a metaphor? AS Wimer stated in his article, the decree was ratified at the cross. This led the captives home to be with out Lord. IT was finished.

When your ready to deal with the text of Matthew 17:2-3. We can move on to this.


I know it is hard to change your mind on a belief, I have yet to see you do so. IT is hard for me also. IF the Lord sees fit, then He will change either of us, and if I am wrong on this, I repent and ask to be given the wisdom to know.

JPK

Joe , you are jumping all over the place , stating texts that have no bearing on the issue at hand regarding the intermediate state of the old testament souls. You ask why, why, why.

Your inability to take counsel elsewhere is your inability to make a stand on the position you take. When you are asked to defend your answer you skirry off elsewhere and prostitute the text to say something it does not say.

That I will bring you to task for.

lionovjudah
02-14-06, 12:19 PM
There are 2 views here Joe. Either the old testament saints souls like Elijah are flying or floating about in the universe and earth. Or in fact their souls in the intermediate state are with the Triune God in heaven.

That is why I remain unconvinced of your view. It is a novel one. It is foreign to what the Scriptures state about "going to heaven".



Yet the texts you bring to bear in no way validate that Elijah or any other saints souls are floating about in the universe. Old testament souls are in heaven.

I lumped all this rhetoric together.

1) They are not floating around in space. lay off the kool aid Raymond. I said, I do not know exactly where they are, but I know where they are not at the time of their death, and that is with God at His throne.

I have shown you numerous scriptures from Christ Peter and Paul. Yet you accuse me of making them mean something else. Well God forbid I take a scripture when appropriate and say it means exactly what it says. Sometime miraculously that can happen ray.

You have provided not one scripture, yet pages of Gill and Calvin. I will stick with the inspred word.

The scripture of ELijah being whisked away proves to you he did not die, and was taken to heaven. Kinda like an assumption hah? And you have the nerve to criticise the rcc for speakign about Mary as you do. Throw in Enoch while you are at it. Start a new doctrine. The Assumption of Enoch, Elijah, and MAry. shhesh.

You claim elijah did not die. Well what about this scripture:

Hebrews 9:27—“...it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment....”


Oh yes I know, It menas Job lived in UZ and knew his redemmer while he had boils. What an unlightened dummy i am

I have shown you where scripture speaks of 3 heavens. All that means is he was taken up into the sky. thats it.. It is that simple. Hece the letter was written because like Philip, the Lord placed him somewhere else on earth.

You accept this with Philip, but not with Elijah? You deride scriptural acocunts I have provided and because they do not fit your grid, they have to mean what they do not explicitly state. So lets force them into the grid, because God forbid if a paradox arises, i will be condemned here.

I believe Christ, Peter, and Paul before gill ,calvin and you. Those 3 explicitly state no man has ascended except Christ. He was, is and will always be the first. The OT saints, because their justification was not yet ratified, rested in shoel, waiting for the glorious promise of resurrection to life.

You will bring me to task? You think way to highly of yourself Raymond. And your position here. But I forgive you. Not much happening in Wingham anyway. You mite as well beat your chest on the web.

Anyway, i will deal with the trans figuration, when you deal adequitly with what I propose.

John 3:13

Acts 2

Pauls verses stating Christ is the first to rise.

ray kikkert
02-14-06, 03:38 PM
I lumped all this rhetoric together.

1) They are not floating around in space. lay off the kool aid Raymond. I said, I do not know exactly where they are, but I know where they are not at the time of their death, and that is with God at His throne.

What is your definition of the "Throne of God"??



I have shown you numerous scriptures from Christ Peter and Paul. Yet you accuse me of making them mean something else. Well God forbid I take a scripture when appropriate and say it means exactly what it says. Sometime miraculously that can happen ray.

Yes your 2 examples of John 3:13 and Acts 2 do not speak to the intermediate state of old testament saints, but speak unto the fact that Christ, not man would attain salvation for God's chosen elect for no man could attain salvation for himself apart from Christ.




You have provided not one scripture, yet pages of Gill and Calvin. I will stick with the inspred word.

I haven't ?? Are you going to stand by that Joe??




The scripture of ELijah being whisked away proves to you he did not die, and was taken to heaven. Kinda like an assumption hah? And you have the nerve to criticise the rcc for speakign about Mary as you do. Throw in Enoch while you are at it. Start a new doctrine. The Assumption of Enoch, Elijah, and MAry. shhesh.

"and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven" This same Elijah that was seen of the disciples at the mount of transfiquration. It is not assumption. It is based on the text.



You claim elijah did not die. Well what about this scripture:

Hebrews 9:27—“...it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment....”

John Calvins commentary:

27. And as it is appointed, etc. The meaning is this: since we patiently wait after death for the day of judgment, it being the common lot of nature which it is not right to struggle against; why should there be less patience in waiting for the second coming of Christ? For if a long interval of time does not diminish, as to men, the hope of a happy resurrection, how unreasonable would it be to render less honor to Christ? But less would it be, were we to call upon him to undergo a second death, when he had once died. Were any one to object and say, that some had died twice, such as Lazarus, and not once; the answer would be this, -- that the Apostle speaks here of the ordinary lot of men; but they are to be excepted from this condition, who shall by an instantaneous change put off corruption, (1 Corinthians 15:51 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=1Corinthians+15:51,);) for he includes none but those who wait for a long time in the dust for the redemption of their bodies.


.....and John Gill's exposition:

Hebrews 9:27 (http://www.freegrace.net/kjv/Hebrews/9.html#27)

Ver. 27. And as it is appointed unto men once to die,.... Not a moral, or what is commonly called a spiritual death, nor an eternal one, but a corporeal one; which does not arise from the constitution of nature, but from the sin of man, and God's decree on account of it; by which it is fixed that men shall die, and how long they shall live, and when they shall die; so that they cannot die sooner nor later; all things antecedent to death, which lead on to it, and issue in it, are appointed by God, and so is death itself, with all its circumstances; men's days can neither be lengthened nor shortened, either by Christ himself, or others: and this statute and appointment of God concerns men, not angels, and reaches to all men, wicked and righteous; and though there have been some exceptions, as Enoch and Elijah; and all will not sleep, or die, some will be found alive at Christ's appearing; yet such will undergo a change which is equivalent to death, as Enoch and Elijah have done: and generally speaking men die but once; it is not usual for men to die, and live again, and then die again; there have been some extraordinary instances of this kind, but they are rare; it is the statute law of heaven in common for men to die and that but once; so Cicero {o} the Heathen says, "omnibus definitam esse mortem": Christ died once, he will die no more; and it is the comfort of the saints, that though they die the first death, they shall not be hurt of the second death; and the consideration of this decree should excite to diligence and industry: death is certain to God, but uncertain to us, as to the time, nor should we curiously inquire into it, but patiently wait for it, and quietly submit unto it:

but after this the judgment; the last and general judgment, which will reach to all men, quick and dead, righteous and wicked, and in which Christ will be Judge. There is a particular judgment which is immediately after death; by virtue of which, the souls of men are condemned to their proper state of happiness or woe; and there is an universal judgment, which will be after the resurrection of the dead, and is called eternal judgment, and to come; this is appointed by God, though the time when is unknown to men; yet nothing is more certain, and it will be a righteous one.

{o} Pro Sextio



Oh yes I know, It menas Job lived in UZ and knew his redemmer while he had boils. What an unlightened dummy i am

Yes a doctrinal idiot you are indeed. You make of small repute the testimony of Job. It seems the more you post Joe the more you put yourself between a rock and hardplace and exhibit the babble of the baseless.



I have shown you where scripture speaks of 3 heavens. All that means is he was taken up into the sky. thats it.. It is that simple. Hece the letter was written because like Philip, the Lord placed him somewhere else on earth.

You accept this with Philip, but not with Elijah?

You mentioned it in reference to Elijah, yet Elijah was taken to heaven, so the text with respect to Philip is baseless.


You deride scriptural acocunts I have provided and because they do not fit your grid, they have to mean what they do not explicitly state. So lets force them into the grid, because God forbid if a paradox arises, i will be condemned here.

Truthful Scriptural exegesis is what it is about.



I believe Christ, Peter, and Paul before gill ,calvin and you. Those 3 explicitly state no man has ascended except Christ. He was, is and will always be the first. The OT saints, because their justification was not yet ratified, rested in shoel, waiting for the glorious promise of resurrection to life.

We shall see how long the exegesis of Joe holds up. Your flip flopping on the issue of the old testament soul in the intermediate state - confusion.



You will bring me to task? You think way to highly of yourself Raymond. And your position here. But I forgive you. Not much happening in Wingham anyway. You mite as well beat your chest on the web.

See that's the thing Joe, it is not about me or you. It is about the truth of Scripture and how the Lord reveals Himself to us in the Gospel, and if the Lord tarries, what will become of our bodies and what will become of our souls.


Anyway, i will deal with the trans figuration, when you deal adequitly with what I propose.

John 3:13

Acts 2

Pauls verses stating Christ is the first to rise.

Well I have already, so I await your response.

lionovjudah
02-14-06, 04:02 PM
What is your definition of the "Throne of God"??

The heaven of Gods throne. The Fathers House. Where Christ sits at the Right hand. 1 Peter 3:22 Deuteronomy 10:14; Psalms 148:4, Psalm 115:16, "The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD'S." this shows 2 heavens spoken of here. The throne of God is where we will eternally be with Christ reigning with Him.

Are you denying there are many scriptures that mention heaven without meaning Gods throne?

read this from Job, your band aid book for everything

Job 37:18 18: Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?
same Hebrew word used.





Yes your 2 examples of John 3:13 and Acts 2 do not speak to the intermediate state of old testament saints, but speak unto the fact that Christ, not man would attain salvation for God's chosen elect for no man could attain salvation for himself apart from Christ.

Are you serious? And why is this? Where do you get that from? Salvation is not even mentioned. Why can it not mean what it says?




"and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven" This same Elijah that was seen of the disciples at the mount of transfiquration. It is not assumption. It is based on the text.

You must not be awae of the rcc doctrine called the assumption of Mary. It states she did not die and rot in the grave, but immediately went body and soul and spirit to be with the Lord.

We shall skip Gill and Calvin. Heard enough from them on this subject.





Yes a doctrinal idiot you are indeed. You make of small repute the testimony of Job. It seems the more you post Joe the more you put yourself between a rock and hardplace and exhibit the babble of the baseless.

I am not stuck anywhere Ray. another kool aid induced imagination of yours.





Truthful Scriptural exegesis is what it is about.

How does posting Gill and Calvin, the COD, and Job show truthful exegesis? :cool:





We shall see how long the exegesis of Joe holds up. Your flip flopping on the issue of the old testament soul in the intermediate state - confusion.

Never have flip flopped ray. Not once. Perhaps it is a language barrier to rock heads.








Well I have already, so I await your response.

OK< If this is the best you have, I will move on to the transfiguration tonight.

beloved57
02-14-06, 05:15 PM
I recommend a reading on this important subject, I don`t agree with the author on all of his writings, but he seems to be on target regarding justification before God.. http://www.gospelgrace.com/webest/JustificationBeforeGod.html :D

Brandan
02-14-06, 05:22 PM
I recommend a reading on this important subject, I don`t agree with the author on all of his writings, but he seems to be on target regarding justification before God.. http://www.gospelgrace.com/webest/JustificationBeforeGod.html :DOne of our moderators, melted (Kyle Baker) listens to WE Best every sunday.

beloved57
02-14-06, 06:32 PM
Yes, He has some good material on soteriology, and he seems to be well verse with the greek !

Washington Kid
02-14-06, 09:13 PM
CHRIST'S RIGHTEOUSNESS IMPUTED AT THE CROSS REVEALED IN THE OLD TESTAMENT #1: God tells us in Daniel 9:24: Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. The "Seventy" are heptads: years. The weeks are sevens. Seventy times seven= 490 years. God is telling us 490 years are determined (predestinated) to: do so many things I would have to write a book to tell it all. Someone else has saved me the time: THE SEVENTY WEEKS AND THE GREAT TRIBULATION by Philip Mauro (Reiner Publications). So to muse on this verse for a moment: God tells us twice ( II Chronicles 36:22,23 & Ezra 1:1-4) that He was going to use Cyrus to let His people go from captivity and to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. God also tells us about this in Isaiah 44:23-45:13. King Cyrus was chosen of God to let God's people go at the appointed time. Then God tells Daniel (and the elect from His Word) that 490 years later Jesus Christ will come and justify the elect by imputing His righteousness to them at the cross. The scribes knew from this prophecy that Christ was to come when He did; that is why Jesus went to Egypt, for King Herod killed all the infants at that time, incase they were the Christ child. Herod was considered by many to be the Christ because of the time frame. Having this as an introduction, let's move on to the truth concerning our present thread: when was Christ's righteousness imputed to the elect? Daniel 9:24 tells us that in no uncertain doctrine, that it happened at the cross. When Christ came within the 490 year time frame, what did He do? Oh brethren rejoice, He didn't wait until faith was given to each elect, He established a perfect righteousness and imputed that righteousness to the elect at the cross. Let's just look at what Christ did at the cross according to God: "FINISH THE TRANSGRESSION" (He would stand as our representative); '"MAKE AN END OF SIN " ( Save His people from their sins); "MAKE RECONCILIATION FOR INIQUITY" (reconciliation=justified and justified=righteous;); " BRING IN EVERLASTING RIGHTEOUSNESS" (the only way everlasting righteousness can be brought in is if the elect are justified; which means Christ's righteousness MUST have been imputed to them THEN); "SEAL UP THE VISION AND PROPHECY" (Dan 12:4- this is the gospel message, add nothing to it concerning the ground of salvation); ANOINT THE MOST HOLY (Christ's baptism). Regardless wether one agrees completely with this teaching I promoted, it cannot be Biblically denied that Christ procured the finishing of transgression, made an end of sins, made reconciliation for inquity, and brought in everlasting righteousness AT THE CROSS. With this proclaimed in Holy Writ, one cannot throw out imputed righteousness charged to the elect in this text to an act happpening at a point in time X's the number of the elect; brethren, righteousness was imputed to the elect at the cross- read Daniel 9:24 in your closet.....and rejoice...."it is finished" (Jesus Christ at the cross-John 19:30)..........Kentucky Kid

Bob Higby
02-14-06, 11:27 PM
I just want to emphasize again that based on ALL of these arguments-- we want to confess that JUSTIFICATION or IMPUTATION in TIME is constituted in the event of Christ's atoning death and resurrection. Nothing can detract from this wonderful truth!

In addition to this, many of us believe that the justification or imputation constituted in time was/is also a divine reality in God's ESTIMATION and PURPOSES completely transcendent of time and space. This is apparently the issue on which many of us differ. I, for one, cannot see how God can justify or impute Christ's righteousness in time without also imputing that same righteousness transcendent of time!

Historically speaking, justification or imputation is FROM ETERNITY TO ETERNITY! God purposes or reckons the perfect work of Christ to his elect at all moments in time! This includes their first moment of faith, every moment of their lives, the final judgment, etc. It is all ONE justification and imputation, NOT MANY!

Based on these considerations, hopefully some contributors can see why we differ from most Protestant expositors on this important doctrine.

GraceAmbassador
02-14-06, 11:42 PM
... I, for one, cannot see how God can justify or impute Christ's righteousness in time without also imputing that same righteousness transcendent of time!

Exactly Bob! That is what some refuse to see! They can only see time and cannot understand that God sees everything from end to beginning. Unfortunately, even this argument is becoming a clichę for some and a reason for mockery. But simply is what it is!


Historically speaking, justification or imputation is FROM ETERNITY TO ETERNITY! God purposes or reckons the perfect work of Christ to his elect at all moments in time! This includes their first moment of faith, every moment of their lives, the final judgment, etc. It is all ONE justification and imputation, NOT MANY!

Amen Bob! Just as my son, as a boy was my son the same as he is now as an adult! He was a person, a full human being that happened to be my son in the past as he is now that he is an independent adult. Anyone can change this to the eternity of God and they will understand what we talk about.




Based on these considerations, hopefully some contributors can see why we differ from most Protestant expositors on this important doctrine.

It is my prayer! There is no other way to endure reading some of the opposition opinions in this thread!

Milt

lionovjudah
02-15-06, 07:49 AM
I just want to emphasize again that based on ALL of these arguments-- we want to confess that JUSTIFICATION or IMPUTATION in TIME is constituted in the event of Christ's atoning death and resurrection. Nothing can detract from this wonderful truth!

In addition to this, many of us believe that the justification or imputation constituted in time was/is also a divine reality in God's ESTIMATION and PURPOSES completely transcendent of time and space. This is apparently the issue on which many of us differ. I, for one, cannot see how God can justify or impute Christ's righteousness in time without also imputing that same righteousness transcendent of time!

Historically speaking, justification or imputation is FROM ETERNITY TO ETERNITY! God purposes or reckons the perfect work of Christ to his elect at all moments in time! This includes their first moment of faith, every moment of their lives, the final judgment, etc. It is all ONE justification and imputation, NOT MANY!

Based on these considerations, hopefully some contributors can see why we differ from most Protestant expositors on this important doctrine.

Bob. I can actually agree with this. Of course there are some distinctions, but for the most part, I do not have an issue with this explination. AS I look back and honestly study this, I feel I am still lacking in understanding even with Justification at the cross, of which I profess is the crux. One problem I need ironed out is Justification to me has to be a trinitarian truth. EJ makes justification dependant only upon the Father. JATC includes Christ, but where does the Holy Spirit play in this plan. Doe He have a role in our justification? I do not see it in either of these 2, while I still maintain JATC is 100% true.

Does the trinity have a role in each and every aspect of our salation. This is my delima.

jmgipson
02-15-06, 08:19 AM
Has anyone who has studied the Dead Sea Scrolls (I have just barely got into it) run across any writings by the teacher or anyplace at all about justification and what the predestinarians of those days thought?

John

Brandan
02-15-06, 08:19 AM
Does the trinity have a role in each and every aspect of our salation. This is my delima.The Holy Spirit brings knowledge of salvation to an elect individual.

Brandan
02-15-06, 08:20 AM
Has anyone who has studied the Dead Sea Scrolls (I have just barely got into it) run across any writings by the teacher or anyplace at all about justification and what the predestinarians of those days thought?

JohnOh yeah, there will be some major stuff coming, I'm sure of that!

lionovjudah
02-15-06, 08:44 AM
The Holy Spirit brings knowledge of salvation to an elect individual.

I agree. But is this part of justification? What does this do for our salvation? What difference does it have if the elect has the saving knowledge.

I am not arguing BK. I just would like to kow the Spirits role, if any , in Justification.

Brandan
02-15-06, 08:48 AM
I agree. But is this part of justification? When the Scriptures speak of justification by faith, it is referring to the declaration of righteousness to the individual. So yes, it is a vital aspect of justification. Constitution of righteousness of course is very important. But it is also very important for the individual to know that he is indeed justified in the sight of God.

lionovjudah
02-15-06, 09:20 AM
Raymond: You asked about the transfiguration.

Well here goes this.

This account is simply a prophetic vision which should not be looked at literally. The whole concept of this account is to speak of the immortality in the glorious ressurection to come!!!

Christ Himself called it such ..""Tell the vision to no man". All this would happen in the future when all the saints would be with Christ!!!!

This is like other visions spoken about in the writ.

Peters vision in acts.

Joseph's vision in Genesis

Mickey
02-15-06, 09:46 AM
The Holy Spirit always testifies to the work of Christ, He does this through faith at regeneration and He continues to do so as He teaches the elect. The Spirit is also given as a seal or guarantee (2 Cor 1:22, Eph 1:13-14, Eph 4:30). The work of the Holy Spirit in preservation is just as big a part of salvation as is our Justification by Christ, they are all a work of God alone.

lionovjudah
02-15-06, 09:52 AM
The Holy Spirit always testifies to the work of Christ, He does this through faith at regeneration and He continues to do so as He teaches the elect. The Spirit is also given as a seal or guarantee (2 Cor 1:22, Eph 1:13-14, Eph 4:30). The work of the Holy Spirit in preservation is just as big a part of salvation as is our Justification by Christ, they are all a work of God alone.

Again I agree Mike. I guess I make a mistake of forcing a trinitarian concept of everything in regards to our salvation. Just like you and some fear sacrificing the immutibility of God, my fear is seperating the Godhead

ray kikkert
02-15-06, 10:37 AM
I lumped all this rhetoric together.

1) They are not floating around in space. lay off the kool aid Raymond. I said, I do not know exactly where they are, but I know where they are not at the time of their death, and that is with God at His throne.

Okay Joe, time for a review of your statements to see if they line up.
When asked where old testament souls are , your responses:

-They are not floating around in space.

-I said, I do not know exactly where they are, but I know where they are not at the time of their death, and that is with God at His throne.

-The scriptures speak of the grave/hades/ abrahams bosom. But this is not heaven.

-All I said is He was not in the heaven at the throne of God.


-I said Abes boosom is not heaven.

-Who says they are in Heaven?

-I do not believe paradise =heaven. Hades does not equal heaven. SO wherever you get this notion, it is not in the writ.

-Save Enoch and Elijah, I see no record of men being broght to heaven


I have shown you numerous scriptures from Christ Peter and Paul. Yet you accuse me of making them mean something else. Well God forbid I take a scripture when appropriate and say it means exactly what it says. Sometime miraculously that can happen ray.

Why do you think I mentioned Luke 9:27 ??

What does this mean to you Joe??

doctr_of_grace
02-15-06, 10:50 AM
Ray ... I am just a bit confused and would hope you could clear something up for me :confused: .

Do you believe that the OT saints were resurrected (have glorified bodies) prior to Christ resurrection on the 3rd day after his death?

Bob ... I believe you have summerized for me the stance I hold to now after studying this issue more. Thanks!!

Jan

lionovjudah
02-15-06, 10:50 AM
Why do you think I mentioned Luke 9:27 ??

What does this mean to you Joe??

And I answered about the transfiguration. Scripture is not clear on this ray.

It means Peter james and John saw a vision of moses, elijah with Christ in the glorious promise of the future ressurected kingdom.

Read it closely Ray. They were given a glimpse of what was to come...


But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.

Christ was speaking that Peter James and John would see a glimpse of this promise of eternal Glory with Christ. Christ was not talking about Moses and Elijah. They were both dead and buried. Explicitly Moses.

The answer lies here:
9:31 Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.

They were speaking of the cross and what would result. Their entrance and ratification of the promise of eternal ressurection life

ray kikkert
02-15-06, 11:00 AM
Ray ... I am just a bit confused and would hope you could clear something up for me :confused: .

Do you believe that the OT saints were resurrected (have glorified bodies) prior to Christ resurrection on the 3rd day after his death?

No.

ray kikkert
02-15-06, 12:14 PM
I do not know exactly Ray. But there is nothing in the writ that says they were raised with Christ. The writ explicitly says Chris tis the first one raised form the dead.


I did not notice the mistake I made here. There is nothing in the writ that says they were raised before Christ was raised. Paul says Christ was the first ot be raised from the dead right?

Joe , I went back into the discussion and with talking with Jan, I seriously hope that you do not think that I am arguing that old testament saints have glorified bodies united with their souls before the return of Christ or Christ's resurrection.

I do not and that has never been my argument.

My argument from the get go was:

Where do the souls, not bodies.... of elect old testament saints go when they die??

I have the whole time been discussing the intermediate state of the old testament soul prior to the return of Christ or His resurrection.

I have maintained that in this intermediate state the elect old testament saint's souls are in heaven, and that heaven is being in the fellowship of the Godhead.

I have done so to prove that even before Christ died on the cross, before His resurrection, before Christs return in final judgement, the elect old testament saints soul goes to heaven, proving that in eternity our Lord does view them as justified, and that the imputation of righteous is verily seen in them as well and that His purpose would indeed be fullfilled in time.

I in no way tried to claim that the elect Old Testament saint's soul is united with there gloified body, prior to Christ's death, prior to His resurrection, and prior to His return to judge the quick and the dead.

So just what have you been arguing this whole time????

lionovjudah
02-15-06, 12:59 PM
I have maintained that in this intermediate state the elect old testament saint's souls are in heaven, and that heaven is being in the fellowship of the Godhead.

I have done so to prove that even before Christ died on the cross, before His resurrection, before Christs return in final judgement, the elect old testament saints soul goes to heaven, proving that in eternity our Lord does view them as justified, and that the imputation of righteous is verily seen in them as well and that His purpose would indeed be fullfilled in time.



So just what have you been arguing this whole time????


I am arguing that I believe neither is true. Soul, body, neither are in heaven. Because their sins were not forgiven until Christ shed His blood. I do not believe they were with the reprobate souls, but I can find no evdence that says their sins were forgiven prior to Christs blood being shed. They would not also be with Christ because He did nto have His body yet prior to the incarnation. So why would they go there without Christ being there in bodily form? I just do nt understand. I mean the Rich man spoke to abraham and lazarus, can we speak with those in hell?

jmgipson
02-15-06, 01:35 PM
The Holy and Spotless Elect. Christ says of His, "Thou art all fair, my love, there is not spot in thee," Song 4:7. They are without fault before the throne of God, Rev. 14:5. Justification is first to be considered in the will of God. This will is sometimes called purpose, counsel, choice, election, predestination, love, and the good pleasure of His will, Eph. 1; Rom. 9; Isa. 45:10; Eph. 3:11. We should seek no further to ask a reason of His will. It had no cause going before to cause it to be, or so to be. If it had, how can it be eternal, and infinite? Surely it had no beginning. So the elect are said to be saved before the world, 2 Tim. 1:9,10. And this is called justification, Tit3:4, 7. Then our life was hid with Christ in God, Col. 3:3. This is justification in purpose.

John

ray kikkert
02-15-06, 02:14 PM
I am arguing that I believe neither is true. Soul, body, neither are in heaven. Because their sins were not forgiven until Christ shed His blood. I do not believe they were with the reprobate souls, but I can find no evdence that says their sins were forgiven prior to Christs blood being shed. They would not also be with Christ because He did nto have His body yet prior to the incarnation. So why would they go there without Christ being there in bodily form? I just do nt understand. I mean the Rich man spoke to abraham and lazarus, can we speak with those in hell?

How is it , in your line of reasoning.... that you think that the reprobate old testament wicked souls are in hell......... but that elect old testament saints souls are not in heaven, but elsewhere??

Where then are they??

You have said that they are not in purgatory,
nor that they are not in outer space.

when pressed last time , you stated they were in Abraham's bosom.
Yet it has been proven that "Abraham's bosom" is another term for heaven.

The other theory you have posited is that these souls may indeed be in 1 of 3 heavens. To which one of these heavens is the old testament elect soul in? How is this "heaven" defined ??

I find it odd that you would advocate that the old testament wicked reprobate soul is in hell, but that in the opposite direction , the elect old testament soul would be denied fellowship in heaven with the Godhead.

Please explain.

lionovjudah
02-15-06, 02:50 PM
How is it , in your line of reasoning.... that you think that the reprobate old testament wicked souls are in hell......... but that elect old testament saints souls are not in heaven, but elsewhere??

Where then are they??

You have said that they are not in purgatory,
nor that they are not in outer space.

when pressed last time , you stated they were in Abraham's bosom.
Yet it has been proven that "Abraham's bosom" is another term for heaven.

The other theory you have posited is that these souls may indeed be in 1 of 3 heavens. To which one of these heavens is the old testament elect soul in? How is this "heaven" defined ??

I find it odd that you would advocate that the old testament wicked reprobate soul is in hell, but that in the opposite direction , the elect old testament soul would be denied fellowship in heaven with the Godhead.

Please explain.

For some odd reason you continue to say I have said things I never said!!! Good debate technique ray. You continue to speak of Elijahs whirlwind experience, and lump my answetr their and connect it to OT saints location p[rior to Christs resurrection. perhaps it is my fault and have not been clear. So lets try it again. I will also be more careful in the terms I use.

At the onset, nowhere has it been "proved" that abrahams bosom =the heavenly throne of God. So we can quickly move past this.

1) When Elijah was seen being caught up into a whirlwind, this account does not equal him going to be with the Lord. Heaven used in this account means the sky.

2) All ot testament people who have died prior to the cross/ressurection of Christ, the first to RISE from the dead are in Shoel/hades. Perhaps different compartments. Hence the Rich man being able to talk to lazarus and Abraham.

As I look back, I have not been as clear as I could have. Therefore positing the above 2 answers is as clear as I can get.


3) The souls of those who dies prior to the res of Christ did not go to be with Christ. Because He was not there in bodily form yet. \


this also leads into eternal Justification. Is it the contention of those who propose this that Christ has always been with the Father in bodily form? Were His hands/feet/side pierced before the foundations of the world?

If you say yes to this, then this completely destroys His incarnation. Unless you can believe His incarnation happenned in eternity also.

Angie
02-15-06, 02:56 PM
Joe,
In simple terms, you are thinking in time on everything. Do you see that God is not bound by this in any way? I think we all agree that Christ had to come to earth, to atone, etc.......but, this is as good as done in God's eyes in eternity. You cannot explain OT saints any other way. Are you thinking of eternity as before time, or a really long time ago or something? OT saints are and have been in the same place(with God) since their death. Well, more later if time permits. :)

beloved57
02-15-06, 04:35 PM
Kentucky Kid, thats a good post, it appears to be sound and scriptural what you are presenting...:D

ray kikkert
02-15-06, 04:39 PM
For some odd reason you continue to say I have said things I never said!!! Good debate technique ray.

Well you can check for yourself Joe. I did not list the statements you made in vain. See I believe that good debate skills means being honest and forthright with the statements one brings forth. That is why I listed the statements you made. They are yours , not mine. I am dealing with what you are stating.


You continue to speak of Elijahs whirlwind experience, and lump my answetr their and connect it to OT saints location p[rior to Christs resurrection. perhaps it is my fault and have not been clear. So lets try it again. I will also be more careful in the terms I use.

At the onset, nowhere has it been "proved" that abrahams bosom =the heavenly throne of God. So we can quickly move past this.

See Joe , that is not good debating skills. You stating that Abraham's bosom does not equal the heavenly throne does not make this the truth. You have to first establish this truth to be ligit by a faithful exegesis of the text in question. So you may quickly want to pass over this , yet I would rather see what defintion then you have of Abraham's bosom if it indeed is not the heavenly throne of God.



1) When Elijah was seen being caught up into a whirlwind, this account does not equal him going to be with the Lord. Heaven used in this account means the sky.

Okay Joe , good debating skills would be to list the actual text in question first. Then you would have to explain why you believe the term "heaven" here means "sky" rather than the heavenly throne of God while being truthful with the text as a whole. I hope you see why I mockingly state that in your world Elijah is floating about in the sky awaiting entrance into the heavenly throne of God.



2) All ot testament people who have died prior to the cross/ressurection of Christ, the first to RISE from the dead are in Shoel/hades. Perhaps different compartments. Hence the Rich man being able to talk to lazarus and Abraham.

Okay Joe this really is not "being more careful". What is rising from this Shoel/hades?? The body or the soul. If the body state thus. If the soul, state thus. If you say the soul, then please give a definition of what this Shoel/ hades is and the different compartments you "perhaps" think are here. You would also have to align this with the text (which you again forget to quote from Scripture) of the rich man/Lazurus/Abraham parable.



As I look back, I have not been as clear as I could have. Therefore positing the above 2 answers is as clear as I can get.

Well I will ask for some clarity here. Your going to have to be able to defend your answer not only for me, but maybe for some other poor soul that would have the pleasure of discussing this topic with you.




3) The souls of those who dies prior to the res of Christ did not go to be with Christ. Because He was not there in bodily form yet. \

Okay Joe once again, being "more clear" would mean you will have to be able to back this up with a clear exegetical answer from Scripture that would indeed deal with the topic at hand here which is "where are the souls of elect old testament souls after there death, but before the death, resurrection, and final judgement of our Saviour"




this also leads into eternal Justification. Is it the contention of those who propose this that Christ has always been with the Father in bodily form? Were His hands/feet/side pierced before the foundations of the world?

Joe, I would suggest you answer the questions above, before going on yet another wild adventure free from truthful exegetical restraint.
Lest you be thought to be skirting the issue at hand.



If you say yes to this, then this completely destroys His incarnation. Unless you can believe His incarnation happenned in eternity also.

Well Joe, their is the skirting of a previous issue here, that has not been answered by yourself. But I will ask yet again an answer.

How is it you can advocate that the wicked reprobate old testament soul is in hell??
Is this an eternal hell. Perhaps these reprobate souls too are floating about while being tormented at the same time. Is it that they are perhaps in different compartments of Satan's bosom?? Perhaps it is not even Satan's bosom but some wicked demons bosom?? Perhaps hell does not mean the same thing as a demons bosom??

Please explain.

jmgipson
02-15-06, 06:17 PM
Divine adoption, or sonship, took place before any work of Christ was wrought in time, for any of the sons of men; it was before his incarnation and birth; forasmuch then, or because "the children are partakers of flesh and blood", the children of God, who are so by adopting grace; therefore "he also", Christ, "himself took part of the same"; for though the nature he assumed was what was in common to all mankind, yet he assumed it with a peculiar view to the children of God, the spiritual seed of Abraham; whose nature he is said to take, and for whose sake he was the child born, and the Son given, (Isa. 9:6; Heb. 2:14, 16) and in consequence they must be the children of God before Christ suffered and died; and, indeed, he suffered and died for them under this character, considered as the children of God by adopting grace; for he died not only for the elect of God among the "Jews, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad"; that is, those who were already the children of God by adopting grace, who were scattered throughout the whole Gentile world. This relates to the gathering of all the elect in one, in Christ, in the dispensation of the fulness of times; when Christ suffered as their Surety, Head, and Representative; and when they were all considered as the children of God, whether in heaven or on earth, and whether among Jews or Gentiles, (Eph. 1:10; John 11:51, 52) and in order to bring these many sons to glory, it became him to be made perfect through sufferings, and that through his redemption of them thereby, they might receive, actually in their own persons, the adoption before provided for them, as before observed; see (Heb. 2:10; Gal. 4:5).

The elect of God were espoused to Christ in eternity; as has been shown in the preceding chapter; which serves to illustrate and prove the relation of sonship to God so early; for as in natural and civil marriage, if a man marries a king’s daughter, he becomes his son in law; as David to Saul: or if a woman marries a king’s son, she becomes the king’s daughter: so the elect of God, his church and people, being espoused to the Son of God, they become the sons and daughters of the Lord God almighty, the King of kings; and hence the church is called the King’s daughter, (Ps. 45:13) and these persons being betrothed to Christ, the Son of God, in eternity, as they were the spouse of Christ, they must be, and must be considered as being the sons of God so early. (John Gill)

If we are considered sons by God before Christ went to the cross, then we must be justified in God’s mind to be sons.:cool:

John

lionovjudah
02-16-06, 06:09 AM
Well Joe, their is the skirting of a previous issue here, that has not been answered by yourself. But I will ask yet again an answer.

How is it you can advocate that the wicked reprobate old testament soul is in hell??
Is this an eternal hell. Perhaps these reprobate souls too are floating about while being tormented at the same time. Is it that they are perhaps in different compartments of Satan's bosom?? Perhaps it is not even Satan's bosom but some wicked demons bosom?? Perhaps hell does not mean the same thing as a demons bosom??

Please explain.


Raymond, I am done for now. You in no way will lead me along like a puppy dog with your inane requests and constant repeating. You have it all figured out anyway, wrong as it may be, you still have your own koolaid induced conclusions. I played your game for a while. I graciously clarified my postion for you countless times, yet you accuse me of unfaithful exegesis. Well I know I am speaking to Johnny Ploughboy from Wingham Ray. I do find it ironic you speak to Harald becasue he is too complicated, yet you scramble out of answering anything I have asked by quoting the infallible Gill and Calvin and the COD and of course Job(The answer for all in quieries).

I have shown you the different heavens. I have stated where scritpure alone says these saints are, I have clarified my words, but yet you mock continuously.


Anyway, when you have something to offer other than vain repetitions, Gill, Calvin, COD, I will then perhaps partake of your nonsense. You do the same tactic in all of your debates. you canstantly ask the same questions and spin a web of deceit greater than most politicians. You throw in your boring cliche's. Honestly Ray, you are a good theological parrot, faith by proxy is your life. Now you go do an exegesis on the term "faith by proxy" and the answer is not in Job But I have to go clean the cat litter now, of which ranks higher at this time thrn playing baal with you. Next time I ask to play football, dont bring a hockey puck.

AS an aside, DOn Cherry is smarter and definately funnier than you

melted
02-16-06, 08:38 AM
Raymond, I am done for now. You in no way will lead me along like a puppy dog with your inane requests and constant repeating. You have it all figured out anyway, wrong as it may be, you still have your own koolaid induced conclusions. I played your game for a while. I graciously clarified my postion for you countless times, yet you accuse me of unfaithful exegesis. Well I know I am speaking to Johnny Ploughboy from Wingham Ray. I do find it ironic you speak to Harald becasue he is too complicated, yet you scramble out of answering anything I have asked by quoting the infallible Gill and Calvin and the COD and of course Job(The answer for all in quieries).

I have shown you the different heavens. I have stated where scritpure alone says these saints are, I have clarified my words, but yet you mock continuously.


Anyway, when you have something to offer other than vain repetitions, Gill, Calvin, COD, I will then perhaps partake of your nonsense. You do the same tactic in all of your debates. you canstantly ask the same questions and spin a web of deceit greater than most politicians. You throw in your boring cliche's. Honestly Ray, you are a good theological parrot, faith by proxy is your life. Now you go do an exegesis on the term "faith by proxy" and the answer is not in Job But I have to go clean the cat litter now, of which ranks higher at this time thrn playing baal with you. Next time I ask to play football, dont bring a hockey puck.

AS an aside, DOn Cherry is smarter and definately funnier than youThis kind of rhetoric is rediculous and embarassing. I cringe with embarassment for you. Is it not possible to read over your post prior to hitting submit and remove obvious personal attacks and childish remarks?

It may be a good idea to also review your own signature before clicking the submit button.

"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law."

harald
02-16-06, 08:39 AM
John Gipson,

In your post #365 above you apparently quoted John Gill. Shouldn't you give credit where credit is due?

Harald

melted
02-16-06, 08:48 AM
John Gipson,

In your post #365 above you apparently quoted John Gill. Shouldn't you give credit where credit is due?

Harald He did give credit, Harald.


(John Gill)

Brandan
02-16-06, 09:02 AM
John Gipson,

In your post #365 above you apparently quoted John Gill. Shouldn't you give credit where credit is due?

Harald
Harald, this is the second time you've said this to John. Are you out to prove him wrong by showing him to plagiarize? I hope this is not so as it would only demonstrate an inability on your part to defend your position logically and biblically.

Kyle, thanks for your help!

lionovjudah
02-16-06, 09:31 AM
This kind of rhetoric is rediculous and embarassing. I cringe with embarassment for you. Is it not possible to read over your post prior to hitting submit and remove obvious personal attacks and childish remarks?

It may be a good idea to also review your own signature before clicking the submit button.

"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law."

Kyle, button up your shirt, your heart is falling out. Believe me, Ray can dish it out and he can take it. He is a big boy.

I said nothing that is not true. And if I offended Don Cherry, I apologize.

jmgipson
02-16-06, 09:47 AM
John Gipson,

In your post #365 above you apparently quoted John Gill. Shouldn't you give credit where credit is due?

Harald

Thanks Kyle and Brandan. I need say no more.

John

doctr_of_grace
02-16-06, 11:37 AM
Joe,

I am sorry you have decided to no longer defend your position. I have been there myself at times and I do understand. This idea of yours though will either go away on this thread or it needs to be explained if you want anyone to give it consideration.

The OT saints are as imputed with righteousness as the rest of the elect. (I do equate justification and righteousness imputed). I think Mrs Gill hit the nail on the head when she asked you about "time" being part of your thinking.

Most dispensationalists see prophesy as historical events being fufilled. It is actually much more than that. It has to do with God's decree and how God will never fail in accomplishing his desire or decree. To say that OT saints were not in God's presence seems to be a novel thought for me as a reformed believer. You have failed to show this is in fact the case from scripture while accusing Ray of not using scripture. When Ray quotes Gill or Calvin there are scriptural references (perhaps you scanned over it too quickly) or even didn't bother reading it because it was not Ray's owns words. Nothing wrong with using these men when proving a point (IMHO).

Anyways ... I would hope you wouldn't quit before your job was completed. If you do so be it. The koolaid remarks should be saved for really special blunders if over used it loses it's comic relief (LOL)

Out for now ... Jan

lionovjudah
02-16-06, 12:55 PM
Joe,
In simple terms, you are thinking in time on everything. Do you see that God is not bound by this in any way? I think we all agree that Christ had to come to earth, to atone, etc.......but, this is as good as done in God's eyes in eternity. You cannot explain OT saints any other way. Are you thinking of eternity as before time, or a really long time ago or something? OT saints are and have been in the same place(with God) since their death. Well, more later if time permits. :)


Angela: God is not bound by time, He binds time. He starts at the end and works backwards per se'. Time is bound by His providential workings to bring to fruition His eternal decree. EJ justification is much more than just saying God knows and it as good as done. Noone is arguing this, at least I am not. It is more than God viewing the cross in eternity. It is His actual viewing it at 30 ad.

Yes there is a way to explain the OT saints. Explain it the way scripture explains it. They looked FORWARD, not backwards for their hope in everlasting life. They looked forward for the ressurection unto life.
Since you and Janny are nice, I will t=reluctantly throw my hat back in the ring. And for Ray's sake, letus deal with one topic at a time please.


1) How could OT saints be in Heaven with Christ before He Himself rose? THis is the question. How were their sins forgiven without the shedding of Blood. This could nto be accomplished by their sacrifices. This had to be accomplished with a substitutionary sacrifice in Christ. Now, I asked , "How could Christ have shed His blood prior to His incarnation? TO answer because God is eternal is no answer. IT is a truth, but no answer. IF the elects sins were forgiven, just because God decreed they would be forgiven prior to His son's death, then why send Christ to die? WHy find Mary, why would the Almighty Sovereign God lower Himself and take the form of the created man? The cross is not an after thought with no implications. The cross ratified His decree, The cross was His testament, His fulfillment of His promise. You say they were with God, yet as I pointed out in John 3:13, Christ Himself says NO MAN has, has angela, no man has ascended except Him. Paul says Christ IS the first to rise from the dead.

God knows all, God sees all, God knew I would get married may 1 1993 or 1994 which is it I forgot. Anyway, He most certainly planned every day of my life, but I was not married until may 1 199?

GraceAmbassador
02-16-06, 04:02 PM
Raymond, I am done for now. You in no way will lead me along like a puppy dog with your inane requests and constant repeating. You have it all figured out anyway, wrong as it may be, you still have your own koolaid induced conclusions. I played your game for a while. I graciously clarified my postion for you countless times, yet you accuse me of unfaithful exegesis. Well I know I am speaking to Johnny Ploughboy from Wingham Ray. I do find it ironic you speak to Harald becasue he is too complicated, yet you scramble out of answering anything I have asked by quoting the infallible Gill and Calvin and the COD and of course Job(The answer for all in quieries).

I have shown you the different heavens. I have stated where scritpure alone says these saints are, I have clarified my words, but yet you mock continuously.


Anyway, when you have something to offer other than vain repetitions, Gill, Calvin, COD, I will then perhaps partake of your nonsense. You do the same tactic in all of your debates. you canstantly ask the same questions and spin a web of deceit greater than most politicians. You throw in your boring cliche's. Honestly Ray, you are a good theological parrot, faith by proxy is your life. Now you go do an exegesis on the term "faith by proxy" and the answer is not in Job But I have to go clean the cat litter now, of which ranks higher at this time thrn playing baal with you. Next time I ask to play football, dont bring a hockey puck.

AS an aside, DOn Cherry is smarter and definately funnier than you

There are issues that are debatable here; The Bible speaks of "the heavenlies, third heaven (although it does not say where is the first), Abraham's boson, Sheol" and other expressions, but this is not the way to find out and discuss the issue. At the same time, to deny that "be absent from the body is to be present with THE LORD" (the Glorified Jesus) is pure immaturity.

Now, whether Ray is a big boy or not is not the focus of this forum. If someone failed to take their dose of A.D.D. medicine, please, think twice before posting. I for one have for a long time have gotten sick of childsh tantrums; that's why I refrain from posting in threads that the poster is merely arguing to be the center of attentions with no bona fide desire for discovery. I post once and twice and then leave. I hope the fact that one is a paying subscriber will not give them right to say and write whatever they want here.

Milt

doctr_of_grace
02-16-06, 05:24 PM
Yes there is a way to explain the OT saints. Explain it the way scripture explains it. They looked FORWARD, not backwards for their hope in everlasting life. They looked forward for the ressurection unto life.
Since you and Janny are nice, I will t=reluctantly throw my hat back in the ring. And for Ray's sake, letus deal with one topic at a time please.

Joe ... thanks for the compliment. I fear after this thread is finished you won't think I am so nice :) . Why does it matter whether a person looks backwards or forwards to the cross in order for it to be effectual? The instrument is faith is it not?



1) How could OT saints be in Heaven with Christ before He Himself rose? THis is the question. How were their sins forgiven without the shedding of Blood. This could nto be accomplished by their sacrifices. This had to be accomplished with a substitutionary sacrifice in Christ. Now, I asked , "How could Christ have shed His blood prior to His incarnation? TO answer because God is eternal is no answer. IT is a truth, but no answer. IF the elects sins were forgiven, just because God decreed they would be forgiven prior to His son's death, then why send Christ to die? WHy find Mary, why would the Almighty Sovereign God lower Himself and take the form of the created man? The cross is not an after thought with no implications. The cross ratified His decree, The cross was His testament, His fulfillment of His promise. You say they were with God, yet as I pointed out in John 3:13, Christ Himself says NO MAN has, has angela, no man has ascended except Him. Paul says Christ IS the first to rise from the dead. Joe ... How can your sins be forgiven before you believe? Same answer for the OT saints ... If I am comprehending this concept. God doesn't need to wait for us to believe in order to apply Christ's precious blood ... nor does God wait for an event in "time" to see the OT saints as righteous ... again you are thinking linearly and not even trying to see outside the box. For us this doesn't become real until some point in our lives when we have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit. But that isn't the issue and you keep forcing it to be the issue for those that had been granted faith before the cross.

I am not a real brainy person and this subject was something I struggled through for sometime. Brandan and I discussed it a year ago and I don't think I understood it (probably still don't) haha until recently.

We are considering this from God's perspective not ours and you keep focusing on "our perspective". If I have misunderstood you then please clarify for me this idea that the OT saints faith wasn't real until the cross.

Thanks in advance .... Jan

Whammer
02-16-06, 05:27 PM
How were their sins forgiven without the shedding of Blood. This could nto be accomplished by their sacrifices. This had to be accomplished with a substitutionary sacrifice in Christ. Now, I asked , "How could Christ have shed His blood prior to His incarnation? IF the elects sins were forgiven, just because God decreed they would be forgiven prior to His son's death, then why send Christ to die? WHy find Mary, why would the Almighty Sovereign God lower Himself and take the form of the created man? The cross is not an after thought with no implications. The cross ratified His decree, The cross was His testament, His fulfillment of His promise.

God knows all, God sees all, God knew I would get married may 1 1993 or 1994 which is it I forgot. Anyway, He most certainly planned every day of my life, but I was not married until may 1 199?

I once had a pastor, who knew I loved football, and said this to me....."Bryan, in a game between my favorite team, the Minnesota Vikings and the SF 49rs, we see Joe Montana throw a touch down pass to Jerry Rice, the 49rs fans go wild.......then we get a shot at the instant replay, you as a 49rs fan are waiting to rejoice again and....wait...the replay shows Jerry Rice dropping the pass.....and no touch down?" ..I was startled at this absurdity....and what I am saying should be as obvious as my 1st post......I selected the portion of your last post that I did because there is no disagreement from anyone who has posted on this thread as the nature of those things........I think that you are doing exactly what Mrs Gill said here......and you are not giving a proper place to "THE DECREES" of God.........we are living out the replay at this very moment of a very well laid plan! A PLAN that is THE REAL THING!

lionovjudah
02-16-06, 06:23 PM
Joe ... thanks for the compliment. I fear after this thread is finished you won't think I am so nice :) . Why does it matter whether a person looks backwards or forwards to the cross in order for it to be effectual? The instrument is faith is it not?

It matters because Scripture states it does. We look back to the cross, they looked forward.



Joe ... How can your sins be forgiven before you believe? Same answer for the OT saints ... If I am comprehending this concept. God doesn't need to wait for us to believe in order to apply Christ's precious blood ... nor does God wait for an event in "time" to see the OT saints as righteous ... again you are thinking linearly and not even trying to see outside the box. For us this doesn't become real until some point in our lives when we have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit. But that isn't the issue and you keep forcing it to be the issue for those that had been granted faith before the cross.

The only even He waited for was the death of Christ. Not waiting as wondering when Christ will die. He decreed that in 30ad, all the sins of His elect will be forgiven. The OT saints trusted Gods faithful promise of "The one who comes" and died without receiving that promise, but were united with Christ at the throne after His death and resurrection. I never have .


We are considering this from God's perspective not ours and you keep focusing on "our perspective". If I have misunderstood you then please clarify for me this idea that the OT saints faith wasn't real until the cross.

Thanks in advance .... Jan


Gods perspective was always the historical redemption of His children. Their faith WAS real. Their trust was real. God graciously revealed to them that their promised messiah would come and die for them. And for this they would be saved.

Brandan
02-16-06, 06:35 PM
The only even He waited for was the death of Christ.God does not wait!

Whammer
02-16-06, 06:47 PM
God does not wait!

AMEN!

lionovjudah
02-16-06, 07:16 PM
God does not wait!


WHy not BK? I still do not understand why this is a slam to God to say that in His providence he brings into being at the exact time, exact momemnt He decreed. He waits for the perfect moment according to His divine foreknowledge. God set the conditions of the salvation of the elect, And He fulfilled them all.

jmgipson
02-16-06, 08:00 PM
WHy not BK? I still do not understand why this is a slam to God to say that in His providence he brings into being at the exact time, exact momemnt He decreed. He waits for the perfect moment according to His divine foreknowledge. God set the conditions of the salvation of the elect, And He fulfilled them all.

Look at it this way Joe, How can He wait for a perfect moment according to His foreknowledge when the perfect moment was His decree in the first place, And He is not in time. Wow did I just say that and did that really make any sense.

John

Brandan
02-16-06, 08:04 PM
WHy not BK?Because God already was there.

Bob Higby
02-16-06, 11:08 PM
Joe,

Do not use the kool-aid analogy again when interacting with anyone on this forum. To compare other students of the Word posting here to an unthinking robot committing suicide at the whim of a false teacher: this is the ultimate insult and it will not be tolerated here!

ssmstmspm
02-16-06, 11:47 PM
Question- If God justified, reconciled, imputed righteousness, made holy, forgave the sin, redeemed, saved, all the Elect before the world was even formed, why didnt He just create the Elect Perfect in the first place so they would never sin, so that His Son would never have had to die? If the created has no freewill at all anyway, why didnt He just create an Elect that would never sin? Why didnt He create a people that would worship Him and that would never do wrong, thus negating the need for a Saviour and spare Him the agony of the cross? I dont mean to take away from the arguments here, but wouldnt it have been easier for Him to have created a people who were perfect in the first place? Christ could still have been their king without the need of Him dying a horrible death in the first place.

Mickey
02-16-06, 11:56 PM
Question- If God justified, reconciled, imputed righteousness, made holy, forgave the sin, redeemed, saved, all the Elect before the world was even formed, why didnt He just create the Elect Perfect in the first place so they would never sin, so that His Son would never have had to die?

Because He wanted the create an elect that would sin and need a savior and He wanted to send His Son to redeem them from thier sin. It's pretty simple...because He wanted to!


If the created has no freewill at all anyway, why didnt He just create an Elect that would never sin? Why didnt He create a people that would worship Him and that would never do wrong, thus negating the need for a Saviour and spare Him the agony of the cross?

True, but thats not how He chose to do it is it.


I dont mean to take away from the arguments here, but wouldnt it have been easier for Him to have created a people who were perfect in the first place? Christ could still have been their king without the need of Him dying a horrible death in the first place.

It is easy for God to do anything because all He has to do is think it and it is. It takes no effort whatsoever on God's part to do anything.

jmgipson
02-17-06, 06:15 AM
Question- If God justified, reconciled, imputed righteousness, made holy, forgave the sin, redeemed, saved, all the Elect before the world was even formed, why didnt He just create the Elect Perfect in the first place so they would never sin, so that His Son would never have had to die? If the created has no freewill at all anyway, why didnt He just create an Elect that would never sin? Why didnt He create a people that would worship Him and that would never do wrong, thus negating the need for a Saviour and spare Him the agony of the cross? I dont mean to take away from the arguments here, but wouldnt it have been easier for Him to have created a people who were perfect in the first place? Christ could still have been their king without the need of Him dying a horrible death in the first place.

Some thoughts I put together for my classes in power point taken from various sources:

God is the only one who is truly self-sufficient and has no need of any other but is fully satisfied in Himself and in the fullness of His perfections reflected back to Him in His Son.

This satisfaction in Himself is so great that God desired to share it and purposed to create man, in His own image, to share in His Joy.

However, in order for created man to understand and delight in the Glory of God for all eternity, God decreed that it was necessary for man to first experience and understand all that runs counter to God's glorious attributes in order to better appreciate the wonders of His perfections.

Thus God decreed the fall and its consequential bondage to sin, the glorious redemption through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus, the lamb slain before the foundation of the world, and the subsequent struggling against sin and the need to briefly suffer and persevere before entering into the everlasting joy of the Lord as the best means for men to appreciate, marvel at and enjoy the glory of God.

On a slide show I put these questions up to best illustrate this idea to my Thursday class:

1.How can man understand light if he has not seen darkness?
2.How can man understand God's goodness and love and compassion if he knows nothing of evil and hatred?
3.How can man truly rejoice in the mercy and grace of God in Christ Jesus unless He has seen his own depravity and inability?
4.How can man understand the absolute power of God unless He has been humbled to see that it is God who is at work in him to will and to do?
5.How can man understand the humility of God demonstrated in Christ Jesus humbling Himself even unto death unless he knows about pride?
6.How can man understand the justice and wrath of God unless He sees it manifested?

I use various scriptures to show Rom. 9 etc.

It is clear that God's purpose is not found "in Adam" but "in Christ". Adam walked in innocence, he did not possess a full knowledge of God and His ways. He did not understand the effects of sin and the need for God's judgment of it. It was never God's original purpose to keep man in the state in which he was created, but to bring him to a deep maturity.

This is why God made a tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He made it pleasing to look at. He put it in plain view and reach, and on top of all that, He placed a tempter in the garden.

John

harald
02-17-06, 09:33 AM
My apology to John Gipson (and to anyone else to whom it pertains). I see I made a mistake.


Brandan,

My mistake above has nothing whatsoever to do with not being able (or being able at that) to logically and/or biblically defend a position. Whenever I feel like it I am able to attempt at defending my position. I have done so in this thread already to some degree. No one of you JIE proponents replied any to my saying that JIE negates unconditional election. Were you unable?

Harald

ray kikkert
02-17-06, 09:46 AM
Question- If God justified, reconciled, imputed righteousness, made holy, forgave the sin, redeemed, saved, all the Elect before the world was even formed, why didnt He just create the Elect Perfect in the first place so they would never sin, so that His Son would never have had to die? If the created has no freewill at all anyway, why didnt He just create an Elect that would never sin? Why didnt He create a people that would worship Him and that would never do wrong, thus negating the need for a Saviour and spare Him the agony of the cross? I dont mean to take away from the arguments here, but wouldnt it have been easier for Him to have created a people who were perfect in the first place? Christ could still have been their king without the need of Him dying a horrible death in the first place.

Simple, for the honor and glory of His Name. The Lord does not get His honor and glory simply from His elect chosen. The Lord gets His honor and glory from all His creation.

Isaiah 48 speaks to this fact:)

ray kikkert
02-17-06, 09:53 AM
My apology to John Gipson (and to anyone else to whom it pertains). I see I made a mistake.


Brandan,

My mistake above has nothing whatsoever to do with not being able (or being able at that) to logically and/or biblically defend a position. Whenever I feel like it I am able to attempt at defending my position. I have done so in this thread already to some degree. No one of you JIE proponents replied any to my saying that JIE negates unconditional election. Were you unable?

Harald

Whoa Harold, I do not remember you saying that "JIE negates unconditional election".


Please explain??

ray kikkert
02-17-06, 09:59 AM
Look at it this way Joe, How can He wait for a perfect moment according to His foreknowledge when the perfect moment was His decree in the first place, And He is not in time. Wow did I just say that and did that really make any sense.

John

I think that makes more God glorifying sense then the senseless thought that God has to wait. ;)

lionovjudah
02-17-06, 10:11 AM
I think that makes more God glorifying sense then the senseless thought that God has to wait. ;)

But He waited for some reason did He not Ray? He did wait until 30ad. He is patient and longsuffereing also. He waits to throw into the lake of fire. This waitng is all part of His design.

ray kikkert
02-17-06, 10:21 AM
Raymond, I am done for now.

I can only hope


You in no way will lead me along like a puppy dog with your inane requests and constant repeating.

Answer the questions, then maybe I would not have to repeat


You have it all figured out anyway, wrong as it may be, you still have your own koolaid induced conclusions.

You could have at least answered my questions to you.


I played your game for a while. I graciously clarified my postion for you countless times, yet you accuse me of unfaithful exegesis.

This is no game. But that is quite telling you would refer to this as such. I asked you qyestions. You have not answered them. Is this post your response??


Well I know I am speaking to Johnny Ploughboy from Wingham Ray. I do find it ironic you speak to Harald becasue he is too complicated, yet you scramble out of answering anything I have asked by quoting the infallible Gill and Calvin and the COD and of course Job(The answer for all in quieries).

Well I quoted not only Scripture , but the exegetical exposition of men that have gone before us who give God the glory.

Please answer my questions above.



I have shown you the different heavens. I have stated where scritpure alone says these saints are, I have clarified my words, but yet you mock continuously.

You have shown no such thing. Where does Scripture say these elect old testament saints are?? I mocked that Elijah's soul is floating about in the sky. This is the only answered offered by you thus far.




Anyway, when you have something to offer other than vain repetitions, Gill, Calvin, COD, I will then perhaps partake of your nonsense.

If you will not consider what these have to say, that says alot about how you come to your vain conclusions.


You do the same tactic in all of your debates.

It is consistant counsel that glorifies the Lord , not man.


you canstantly ask the same questions and spin a web of deceit greater than most politicians.

Of course. I ask the same questions because you will not answer them.



You throw in your boring cliche's. Honestly Ray, you are a good theological parrot, faith by proxy is your life. Now you go do an exegesis on the term "faith by proxy" and the answer is not in Job But I have to go clean the cat litter now, of which ranks higher at this time thrn playing baal with you.

Thanks Joe for being my shrink. It speaks volumes.


Next time I ask to play football, dont bring a hockey puck.

Then my advice is .... if you do not want me to bring a hockey puck, then please do not ask me to meet you at the hockey rink, and to bring goalie equipment.

Needless to say the footballs you have thrown at my net, have been pretty easy to quash and stop.;)



AS an aside, DOn Cherry is smarter and definately funnier than you

Then maybe ask Don what happens to elect old testament souls after they die and to where they go. Maybe Don can enlighten you where I have failed. Who knows, you both may have alot in common with respect to this doctrinal topic;)

samohtwerdna
02-17-06, 10:29 AM
There are several posts on this thread which are not quite correct and can lead to devastating errors in our Christology. So I hope to put a few warnings out - to guard from the extreme, and perhaps by God's grace add some clarity.

God and Time:
It is a neat and mostly correct idiom to insist that god is not bound by time. However, it is more scriptural and safe to say that God is only bound by himself! If he has bound himself to something or someone then He is bound. So If God has bound His forgiveness and redemption to the Blood of His Son - Then He is bound to it. There is no scripture verse that say's God is not bound by time, but there are plenty of scriptures that tell us that God has bound himself to us in Covenant and that blood is required for remission of sin. We also know that the covenant of Redemption is Trinitarian and eternal from scripture. We need to stop speculating about what we don't know! For who can understand being outside time? Only one who is not bound by it.

OT and NT death experience:
The bible does clarify differences between the death of the OT saint and the NT saints. Paul statement to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord does in no way demand the same applied to the OT saints. When Christ rose from the grave He lead captivity captive - Who where in captivity? perhaps those in the Bosom of Abraham who scripture says went DOWN to the grave and David declares went DOWN to Sheol. Scripture fully supports a relocation of paradise after the resurrection of Christ - which is an ascension UP to the throne of God where Christ sits at the right hand of the majesty on high and yes I am sorry "when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:" (Heb 1:3) The experience of Enoch and Elijah are in no way to be considered normative - and the mount of transfiguration is not to teach us about heaven but rather about Christ. Christ parable about the rich man and Lazarus is the best teaching we have about the OT saints after death experience and it does not accord with the post resurrection definition of heaven. If any are serious about learning in greater detail the significance and biblical record of these type of things - I highly recommend The Old Testament Eschatology by Geehardus Vos. That should clear up any misconceptions and inform the reader about as well as can be hoped for.

Justification and the Trinity:
Joe, brings a good point to the table when asking about the Spirits role in "Justification". Though I believe firmly in EJ and rejoice in the decrees of God ordering all the affairs of history - It must be said that Christ died while we were yet enemies! Scripture is very clear about this! Before conversion we are not justified! Yet we are justified IN Christ before the foundations of the world. Both are true and not at odds with each other. The Spirit brings salvation - so His work in the life of the elect is crucial! Without it we would not be saved period.

Always keep in mind weather or not the scriptures treat a subject as a "both and" or as a "either or" before making declarative statements that force God into a box of your own making - and always learn God by learning Christ first!

Hope this helps...
Andrew T. Adcock

lionovjudah
02-17-06, 12:33 PM
Answer the questions, then maybe I would not have to repeat


Ok then I will start with the heavens. This answer will be to the question of where did Elijah go when whisked away in the whirlwind?


There are three heavens mentioned in the Bible.

1) The Heaven of Gods throne.

Hebrews 8:1
1

Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;

Deut 26:15


15

Look down from thy holy habitation, from heaven, and bless thy people Israel, and the land which thou hast given us, as thou swarest unto our fathers, a land that floweth with milk and honey.



2) ANother is outer space.

Psalm 8:3

"Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars which You have ordained"


Gen 26:4

And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;



3) the third is the closes atmposphere.

gen 7:11
\
11

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.


Job 35:11
11

Who teacheth us more than the beasts of the earth, and maketh us wiser than the fowls of heaven?




I would like you to notice this verse also Ray.


2Ch 6:18 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2Ch/2Ch006.html#18) But will God in very deed dwell with men on the earth? behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house which I have built!

Notice the word is mentioned twice and does signify a distinction here.



shamayim {shaw-mah'-yim} dual of an unused singular shameh
{shaw-meh'}

1) heaven, heavens, sky
a) visible heavens, sky
1) as abode of the stars 2) as the visible universe, the sky, atmosphere, etc b) Heaven (as the abode of God)


OK Ray, this is your answer to that question. And after careful reading of this, you can now see why at this point, Elijah did not go to the abode of God. But only the visible heaven. I hope I dont have to explain the letter again. Which was written years after this event.

ray kikkert
02-17-06, 12:48 PM
There are several posts on this thread which are not quite correct and can lead to devastating errors in our Christology. So I hope to put a few warnings out - to guard from the extreme, and perhaps by God's grace add some clarity.

God and Time:
It is a neat and mostly correct idiom to insist that god is not bound by time. However, it is more scriptural and safe to say that God is only bound by himself! If he has bound himself to something or someone then He is bound. So If God has bound His forgiveness and redemption to the Blood of His Son - Then He is bound to it. There is no scripture verse that say's God is not bound by time, but there are plenty of scriptures that tell us that God has bound himself to us in Covenant and that blood is required for remission of sin. We also know that the covenant of Redemption is Trinitarian and eternal from scripture. We need to stop speculating about what we don't know! For who can understand being outside time? Only one who is not bound by it.

Well we do know of God's eternal love, He tells us . It is no secret. His love for us is from eternity and in His good pleasure has set His will in motion to show forth His love and righteousness. So Andrew , it would be wise to temper your thought by stating that the Lord does indeed tells us in His Word, what in fact His will is. This is not speculation.



OT and NT death experience:
The bible does clarify differences between the death of the OT saint and the NT saints. Paul statement to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord does in no way demand the same applied to the OT saints. When Christ rose from the grave He lead captivity captive - Who where in captivity?

Andrew , we are discussing where the soul of the elect old testament saint is prior to Christ's incarnation, death, resurrection, and final return. Where are the souls of Job, David....et al??


perhaps those in the Bosom of Abraham who scripture says went DOWN to the grave and David declares went DOWN to Sheol.

are you talking of the place where the body goes, or where the souls goes?? What support would you have for either view??


Scripture fully supports a relocation of paradise after the resurrection of Christ - which is an ascension UP to the throne of God where Christ sits at the right hand of the majesty on high and yes I am sorry "when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:" (Heb 1:3)

Could you be so kind as to show Scriptural support for a relocation of paradise after the resurrection and that indeed the souls of old testament elect saints are in this paradise??


The experience of Enoch and Elijah are in no way to be considered normative - and the mount of transfiguration is not to teach us about heaven but rather about Christ.

Well the topic at hand is dealing with where the soul of the old testament saint is before our Saviours death, resurrection... et al. The transfiguration of Christ tells us not only the visible reference to Elijah, but also to Moses/ Please explain??


Christ parable about the rich man and Lazarus is the best teaching we have about the OT saints after death experience and it does not accord with the post resurrection definition of heaven.

Well Andrew , then it remains for you to explain why you state a difference between the two. I beg to differ that Christ's parable is the best teaching with respect to the place where the old testament elect's soul inhabit before Christ's death, resurrection... etal.


If any are serious about learning in greater detail the significance and biblical record of these type of things - I highly recommend The Old Testament Eschatology by Geehardus Vos. That should clear up any misconceptions and inform the reader about as well as can be hoped for.

No Andrew I do not think it will. It would be wiser for you to quote from Vos, you think is very pertainent with regards to the place the elect old testament souls inhabit. That way we not only see where Vos stands, but also where you stand as well.



Justification and the Trinity:
Joe, brings a good point to the table when asking about the Spirits role in "Justification". Though I believe firmly in EJ and rejoice in the decrees of God ordering all the affairs of history - It must be said that Christ died while we were yet enemies!

The very fact we are enemies in the sense of our sin is a predestined purpose of the Lord. Do you agree?


Scripture is very clear about this! Before conversion we are not justified! Yet we are justified IN Christ before the foundations of the world. Both are true and not at odds with each other. The Spirit brings salvation - so His work in the life of the elect is crucial! Without it we would not be saved period.

Did you familize yourself with the statement Melted put together. If so, do you agree or disagree with His finding??



Always keep in mind weather or not the scriptures treat a subject as a "both and" or as a "either or" before making declarative statements that force God into a box of your own making - and always learn God by learning Christ first!

Hope this helps...
Andrew T. Adcock

Well you would have to show and prove where any of us here are putting the Lord "into a box" per say. You have manifolds posts with which to work with here. If you have a problem with some statements, then I would suggest reposting them and dealing with them.

After all it was you who stated "There are several posts on this thread which are not quite correct and can lead to devastating errors in our Christology."
:)

Saint Nicholas
02-17-06, 02:58 PM
[QUOTE]Justification and the Trinity:
Joe, brings a good point to the table when asking about the Spirits role in "Justification". Though I believe firmly in EJ and rejoice in the decrees of God ordering all the affairs of history - It must be said that Christ died while we were yet enemies! Scripture is very clear about this! Before conversion we are not justified!

Andrew....You are making a fatal error here. By saying the elect were not Justified prior to regeneration, you have sided with the Roman Catholic Church (ala..Augustine.) not good! What you are proposing here is the Catholic teaching of (GRATIA INFUSA)., infused grace. You can skirt around this all you want. Impute can never be re-defined as infused. I would like you to answer a few questions for me. (1) Was Christ's Sacrifice at the cross a potential Justification? or was it an actual Justification, a real transfer of our sin debt to him, and His righteousness accounted to us, before we ever existed? (2) Is regenerative grace & faith a WORK that we cooperate with and the basis (ground) of our Justification?
(3) Is Regeneration and faith toward Christ, the formal cause of our Justification? Or is regeneration and faith the FRUIT AND CONSEQUENCE of our Justification. Your clever sophistry will get you nowhere with me. I was educated in the Satanic schools of Rome, many many years ago. So do not attempt to equivocate with me.







Yet we are justified IN Christ before the foundations of the world. Both are true and not at odds with each other. The Spirit brings salvation - so His work in the life of the elect is crucial! Without it we would not be saved period.
You contradict yourself. You say that we are Justified IN Christ before the foudation of the world, and we are not Justified prior to regeneration and faith.......Nicholas

ray kikkert
02-17-06, 03:14 PM
Ok then I will start with the heavens. This answer will be to the question of where did Elijah go when whisked away in the whirlwind?


There are three heavens mentioned in the Bible.

1) The Heaven of Gods throne.

Hebrews 8:1
1

Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;

Deut 26:15


15

Look down from thy holy habitation, from heaven, and bless thy people Israel, and the land which thou hast given us, as thou swarest unto our fathers, a land that floweth with milk and honey.



2) ANother is outer space.

Psalm 8:3

"Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars which You have ordained"


Gen 26:4

And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;



3) the third is the closes atmposphere.

gen 7:11
\
11

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.


Job 35:11
11

Who teacheth us more than the beasts of the earth, and maketh us wiser than the fowls of heaven?




I would like you to notice this verse also Ray.


2Ch 6:18 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2Ch/2Ch006.html#18) But will God in very deed dwell with men on the earth? behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house which I have built!

Notice the word is mentioned twice and does signify a distinction here.



shamayim {shaw-mah'-yim} dual of an unused singular shameh
{shaw-meh'}

1) heaven, heavens, sky
a) visible heavens, sky
1) as abode of the stars 2) as the visible universe, the sky, atmosphere, etc b) Heaven (as the abode of God)


OK Ray, this is your answer to that question. And after careful reading of this, you can now see why at this point, Elijah did not go to the abode of God. But only the visible heaven. I hope I dont have to explain the letter again. Which was written years after this event.


Okay Joe.

Then in dealing with the account of Elijah, how did you determine which definition of heaven to use??

Washington Kid
02-17-06, 05:36 PM
CHRIST'S RIGHTEOUS IMPUTED TO THE ELECT AT THE CROSS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT #2: I believe this thread has clearly promoted the Biblical fact that Christ's righteousness was imputed to the elect at the cross. I wanted to share one more verse because it is such good news for sinners. God tells us in Isaiah 53:11: " He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities". God's righteous servant (Christ) will justify many. How? He shall bear their iniquities. Justify means to be righteous. The only way Christ justifies the many is by His righteousness being imputed to them. When then was Christ's righteousness imputed? When He bore their iniquities.......AT THE CROSS...........Praise God!......Kentucky Kid

samohtwerdna
02-17-06, 07:47 PM
Dear Ray and Nic,

My post was a warning about were some might go if not held to the scrutiny of the written word. I did not direct anything against what I have read by either of you. I am interested Ray, why did you take it that way?

Now, concerning Ray's comment about Vos and the need to quote him. I must first say that I am often away from my library and cannot fetch quotes from book not on the Internet, second the whole of his 144 pg book is applicable and helpful in the questions raised here about individual eschatology and the difference between the OT and NT saint. I will not quote the whole thing but here is a snippet:


From the foregoing, it will appear what the common way of envisaging [the grave was]... The question arises: Was this merely the ignorance or ...[the lack of] ... enlightenment among Israel in that time? Or was there...a dismal state of mind, be it a provisional dismal reality of [the future]? This question is not easy to answer. One thing is sure, we have no [right to] ... generalize this conception of the state after death, as though it belonged to the fixed lot of the people of God for all generations, in the New Testament no less than in the Old. Our Lord through his teaching and resurrection has made this plain to us. After him and on the basis of his work, the apostles have made plain to us that of the present intermediate state such things can be, at least as to Christians, no longer affirmed. There has been progress not merely in knowledge of this matter, but a real change in the actualities of experience and destiny." (pg13)

Just prior to this statement Vos quoted over 30 verses in the OT that have an opposite trajectory for the believer after death than what is now thought to be the case (upwards to the throne)! I mentioned in my post that the Vos book was helpful for any one serious about the subject - and I stand by this. I am not mounting arguments here, but merely trying to direct with reminders towards biblical accuracy.


So Andrew , it would be wise to temper your thought by stating that the Lord does indeed tells us in His Word, what in fact His will is. This is not speculation.

speculation is to say God is... and then fill in the blank with an idea without scriptural support.


The very fact we are enemies in the sense of our sin is a predestined purpose of the Lord. Do you agree?

Of course! predestine purpose and reality of enmity are two different things. Some here suggest that prior to conversion you are only unaware of your salvation - the Spirit merely makes you aware. Ray, do you take this stand? I am quite sure that no leader in the PRC would endorse this view - what would you say to them??


St. Nic,
I did not intend to lead to an infused righteous stand. My point is that scripture (not the RCC) clearly teaches that regeneration brings us from death to life! Not from life to an acknowledgment of life. If the Spirit does not quicken us then we are dead in our trespasses and sins. This is not Infusion - but regeneration. I did not contradict myself when I then stated another biblical truth that we where saved IN Christ before the foundation of the world. Both statements are what the New Testament teaches without apology. Sorry if I worded it strangely, but I am not trying to trick anyone with sophistry.

ATA

beloved57
02-17-06, 07:55 PM
Andrew....You are making a fatal error here. By saying the elect were not Justified prior to regeneration, you have sided with the Roman Catholic Church (ala..Augustine.) not good! What you are proposing here is the Catholic teaching of (GRATIA INFUSA)., infused grace. You can skirt around this all you want. Impute can never be re-defined as infused. I would like you to answer a few questions for me. (1) Was Christ's Sacrifice at the cross a potential Justification? or was it an actual Justification, a real transfer of our sin debt to him, and His righteousness accounted to us, before we ever existed? (2) Is regenerative grace & faith a WORK that we cooperate with and the basis (ground) of our Justification? (3) Is Regeneration and faith toward Christ, the formal cause of our Justification? Or is regeneration and faith the FRUIT AND CONSEQUENCE of our Justification. Your clever sophistry will get you nowhere with me. I was educated in the Satanic schools of Rome, many many years ago. So do not attempt to equivocate with me.

You contradict yourself. You say that we are Justified IN Christ before the foudation of the world, and we are not Justified prior to regeneration and faith.......Nicholas

Good observation saint joe, the gentleman does contradict himself...

(edited by Darth Gill to fix formatting)

Saint Nicholas
02-17-06, 08:06 PM
Dear Ray and Nic,

My post was a warning about were some might go if not held to the scrutiny of the written word. I did not direct anything against what I have read by either of you. I am interested Ray, why did you take it that way?

Now, concerning Ray's comment about Vos and the need to quote him. I must first say that I am often away from my library and cannot fetch quotes from book not on the Internet, second the whole of his 144 pg book is applicable and helpful in the questions raised here about individual eschatology and the difference between the OT and NT saint. I will not quote the whole thing but here is a snippet:



Just prior to this statement Vos quoted over 30 verses in the OT that have an opposite trajectory for the believer after death than what is now thought to be the case (upwards to the throne)! I mentioned in my post that the Vos book was helpful for any one serious about the subject - and I stand by this. I am not mounting arguments here, but merely trying to direct with reminders towards biblical accuracy.


speculation is to say God is... and then fill in the blank with an idea without scriptural support.


Of course! predestine purpose and reality of enmity are two different things. Some here suggest that prior to conversion you are only unaware of your salvation - the Spirit merely makes you aware. Ray, do you take this stand? I am quite sure that no leader in the PRC would endorse this view - what would you say to them??



St. Nic,
I did not intend to lead to an infused righteous stand. My point is that scripture (not the RCC) clearly teaches that regeneration brings us from death to life! Not from life to an acknowledgment of life. If the Spirit does not quicken us then we are dead in our trespasses and sins. This is not Infusion - but regeneration. I did not contradict myself when I then stated another biblical truth that we where saved IN Christ before the foundation of the world. Both statements are what the New Testament teaches without apology. Sorry if I worded it strangely, but I am not trying to trick anyone with sophistry.

ATA

Andrew....I posed three simple questions for you to answer. You have not answered them at all. Please do so kindly. I understand that Regeneration brings us from spiritual death to life, this is not the issue. You are trying to dodge the questions that I put forth. I also understand that we were saved in Christ before the foundation of the world. This also is not the issue. Please answer the questions I put forth. We are discussing Justification not regeneration!

Nicholas

Bob Higby
02-18-06, 02:55 AM
Vos quoted over 30 verses in the OT that have an opposite trajectory for the believer after death than what is now thought to be the case (upwards to the throne)!

These are those that state that all men (righteous & wicked) go to Sheol (the realm and rule of the state of death) at death, which hardly exhausts the truth of what happened to OT saints. The fact of progressive revelation and an increase in man's understanding of the divine reality over time does not negate God's reality transcendent of that earlier limited understanding. Christ did not go to a different place at his ascension than he had been before his incarnation--and I can see nothing in the Bible that would lead us to believe the deceased OT saints went anywhere else than to be with him after they died.

Eph. 4:8 is clear on the meaning of "led captivity captive"; it refers to the 'sealing up' of death and hades accomplished by Christ when he descended before he ascended on high (after his resurrection). He went and preached doom and eternal judgment to the spirits in prison. His atonement not only constituted the saints justified; it sealed up the judgment of the reprobate! Christ also defeated death in his own resurrection to eternal life--but we have no evidence that others have yet been resurrected with him--in the sense of the final resurrection body made like unto his--that awaits the eschaton.

I'm a little concerned that we do not forget the scriptural teaching that justification has a public, individual dimension. That dimension of justification starts when we are regenerated unto faith and continues to eternity beyond that point. This is not to say that justification begins at regeneration--far from it! It is to say that the public and declared dimension of it--with respect to a particular individual's eternal life--is hidden and concealed in God's purposes until then.

lionovjudah
02-18-06, 06:11 AM
Vos quoted over 30 verses in the OT that have an opposite trajectory for the believer after death than what is now thought to be the case (upwards to the throne)!

These are those that state that all men (righteous & wicked) go to Sheol (the realm and rule of the state of death) at death, which hardly exhausts the truth of what happened to OT saints. The fact of progressive revelation and an increase in man's understanding of the divine reality over time does not negate God's reality transcendent of that earlier limited understanding. Christ did not go to a different place at his ascension than he had been before his incarnation--and I can see nothing in the Bible that would lead us to believe the deceased OT saints went anywhere else than to be with him after they died.




Robert, may I post a few scriptures. Progressive revelation also has an acorn every time, it does not start out as a full blown tree. Progressive revelation created exnihlo is to be scrutinized with veracity.


Psalm 9:17; 17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

The Word hell is also translated shoel


31;17; 17 Let me not be ashamed, O LORD; for I have called upon thee: let the wicked be ashamed, and let them be silent in the grave.

14 Like sheep they are laid in the grave; death shall feed on them; and the upright shall have dominion over them in the morning; and their beauty shall consume in the grave from their dwelling.



Genesis 37:35 35 And all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted; and he said, For I will go down into the grave unto my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him.


Job 14:13
13 O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me!

Psalm 6:5

5 For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?

88:3
4 I am counted with them that go down into the pit: I am as a man that hath no strength:
5 Free among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, whom thou rememberest no more: and they are cut off from thy hand.
6 Thou hast laid me in the lowest pit, in darkness, in the deeps.



TO me these scriptures speak of both the wicked and saints went to the sam eplace.



I myself have ever mentioned Christ. I have stated He is the first to ascend. I also believe Ray inadequitly explained John 3:13 and Acts 2.34.

for David did not go up to the heavens, and he saith himself: The Lord saith to my lord, Sit thou at my right hand,

and no one hath gone up to the heaven, except he who out of the heaven came down -- the Son of Man who is in the heaven.


Now the reson for me to connect this issue with justification is becasue their justification was not not ratified until His death. Hence they rested in Shoel


JPK

lionovjudah
02-18-06, 09:38 AM
Okay Joe.

Then in dealing with the account of Elijah, how did you determine which definition of heaven to use??

By

1)the context.

2) comparing it to other Scriptures where the same word and thought is used.

3) John 3:13

4)Acts 2:34

5) Paul stating the Christ was the first.

Luke 16 parable

I would also like to state that in 1 Cor 15. Paul said "17and if Christ has not been raised your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men. 20But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.

Paul says without His resurrection we are still in our sins. Then those who have fallen asleep IN CHRIST (OT saints) or anyone prior to this event, are not in heaven becasue Christ had not ascended yet. These people are in fact in Christ, but where is Christ? not i n heaven yet

jmgipson
02-18-06, 01:04 PM
Question:

If the imputation of righteousness requires our actual existence, the imputation of sin does also. This is why imputation can be without our existence. That sin was imputed to us before we had an actual being, is evident, for sin was imputed to us when we were made sinners, which we were immediately by the fall of Adam as we see in Romans 5:19. That is, all the posterity of Adam were by God reputed sinners, because they sinned in him as their public head.



So, since sin inherent suposes that sin is imputed, so also inherent righteousness presupposes righteousness is imputed. (T. Goodman)

John

lionovjudah
02-18-06, 01:35 PM
Question:

If the imputation of righteousness requires our actual existence, the imputation of sin does also. This is why imputation can be without our existence. That sin was imputed to us before we had an actual being, is evident, for sin was imputed to us when we were made sinners, which we were immediately by the fall of Adam as we see in Romans 5:19. That is, all the posterity of Adam were by God reputed sinners, because they sinned in him as their public head.



So, since sin inherent suposes that sin is imputed, so also inherent righteousness presupposes righteousness is imputed. (T. Goodman)

John


NOt so fast there John!! The question should be when was our sin/sins imputed to Christ? That was at the cross.

And the goodman quote is a riddle!!!!

JPK

jmgipson
02-18-06, 01:56 PM
NOt so fast there John!! The question should be when was our sin/sins imputed to Christ? That was at the cross.

And the goodman quote is a riddle!!!!

JPK

Then you must answer of whom it is in Romans 4:8


8 Blessed <3107> is the man <435> to whom <3739> the Lord <2962> will <3049> <0> not <3364> impute <3049> (5667) sin <266>.


3364 ouv me ou me {oo may}

Meaning: 1) never, certainly not, not at all, by no means

Origin: from 3756 and 3361;; particle

Usage: AV - not 56, in no wise 6, no 6, never + 1519 + 165 + 3588 6, no more at all + 2089 5, not tr 1, misc 14; 94


Geneva Bible Notes: None for this verse.

You must follow the same idea that our sins where imputed to Christ and His righteousness imputed to us before the foundation of the world.

John

harald
02-18-06, 06:32 PM
John,

Since you maintain "imputation of Christ's righteousness" before the foundation of the world, do you have any Scripture verse or passage which plainly teaches this?

Harald

Brandan
02-18-06, 07:00 PM
John,

Since you maintain "imputation of Christ's righteousness" before the foundation of the world, do you have any Scripture verse or passage which plainly teaches this?

Harald
Harald, you're being suspended for a week because it appears to me you're not interested in sincere research and study. There has been plenty evidence given in this thread, you just have simply refused to read it.

Bob Higby
02-18-06, 07:03 PM
Well, I am getting weary of all these irrational arguments as I'm sure many others are also.

Joe"The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

The Word hell is also translated shoel

Fine, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND that you believe the elect were put into hell (or hell-fire, even) prior to the atonement--it has been made abundantly clear through your posts of the last week or two! I thank God hourly that I have been delivered from such an obviously absurd interpretation of scripture! The use of Sheol in this instance simply means that the plans and aspirations of the wicked come to nothing--they are going to die and face what is beyond the curtain in the realm of death!

Harald, please exegete Rom. 8:29-30 and do not use the argument that tense determines meaning!

Brandan
02-18-06, 07:09 PM
Also, Joe, the next time you attack Ray or anyone else for that matter, you will be suspended for two weeks. :) This is just a friendly reminder.

Brandan
02-18-06, 07:10 PM
I'm thinking of closing this thread. What does everyone else think? Is there anything else that needs to be said?

jmgipson
02-18-06, 07:12 PM
I think we have gone in a circle , but saying that I must admit it has reinforced my belief in justification and imputation in eternity.

John

Brandan
02-18-06, 07:16 PM
OK, I'm closing this thread. If anyone wants to discuss how their views have changed or been reinforced, use this thread: http://www.predestinarian.net/showthread.php?t=3094

Do not use that thread as a means of debating doctrine. It's simply meant to be used as reflection.

Thank yous go out to all participants. I am glad that my understanding has been reinforced. I really do have a better understanding and can articulate my position much better.

This is the second largest thread in the history of this website! It was a good one folks! Now let's move onto something else. :)


http://www.5solas.org/images/threadclosed.jpg