Pristine Grace
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 7 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 165

Thread: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

  1. #121
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    321
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by MCoving View Post
    I understand your position though dont agree with it, I think its only confusing to say that Christ died for all people when He didn't. Theres nothing about the cross that is for the nonelect. The things you mentioned earlier about the overall picture of Gods penalty for sin and righteousness doesn't have to do directly with who Christ died for, the atonement.. to atone for sins, that is what atonement means and Christ ONLY atoned for the sins of the Elect. So to say there is a universal atonement, or to say the catch phrase Christ died for all... is to imply universal atonement.. that Christ atoned for every SINGLE sin. What you say here:

    "If, however, all that is meant by the concept that 'Christ died for all' (everyone) is to magnify God's just penalty for sin and His righteous government of all His creation; to provide the OBJECTIVE grounds to bring an alienated creature into relationship with God; to demonstrate the INFINITE VALUE OF THE WORK BY WHICH HUMANS ARE BROUGHT BACK TO GOD, then I affirm it gladly as a true scriptural sentiment."

    Is NOT what people think when someone says Christ died for all.. I dont think anyone besides you thinks that, thats an entirely different idea.

    Also the verse you mentioned... 2 Peter 2:1 You think it means that ALL people are brought back to God? I am a bit confused on this verse because it talks about false prophets and then talks about denying the Master and then who brought them. Where did the Master bring them??? Makes no sense Christ didn't die for false prophets.. unless they are false prophets who are elect and come out of it... Im confused. Robert or Nicholas, anyone else... what does the word brought mean here?

    Thanks!
    Hi Mary,

    I don't think you understand my position, actually!

    I am happy to give further explanation of what I believe Hebrews 2:9 and 2 Peter 2:1 mean. In doing this, it has become CLEAR to me now - after reading many theological Articles on this site - where I agree with Pnet's position and where I differ. I DO acknowledge there are differences between us and what I am about to present to you as my position on these matters is NOT intended to OVERTHROW your doctrinal system (as you understand it) or that of Pnet. It is only offered out of honesty and courtesy and is not intended to unsettle or agitate you, in any way.

    I am grateful to this site that it is only through DIALOGUE and DISCUSSION that my true position has emerged. I am happy to share it although I realise that it will most probably be met with objections by most on this forum. However, I am not intimidated in any way and my conscience is clear before God which is the only thing that matters.

    In the case of 2 Peter 2:1, I believe that the biblical idea is that the Lord by His death "BOUGHT" all creation and all human beings including "false teachers". If these people DENY the Crown Rights of the Lord Jesus they will surely plunge themselves into everlasting destruction; in this sense they DENY the CLAIMS OF DEITY on their lives and they rise up against their Sovereign Master! They DENY THE LORD WHO BOUGHT THEM!

    However, none are redeemed except those who through faith put their trust and confidence in Christ's shed blood the forgiveness of their sins. It is apparent that only THE ELECT CAN AND WILL DO THIS! There is, then, a SPECIAL REDEMPTION which is divinely designed, intended and applied only for and to the ELECT. There is both in scripture a 'universal purchase' (2 Peter 2:1 and Hebrews 2:9); and a 'special redemption' (Hebrews 2:10 'many sons' brought by Christ into glory) of which I have articulated and explained at length.

    By His death on the Cross the Lord added to His Creator rights and made every creature His by that infinite purchase. All are his and not their own, in this sense. But redemption delivers from Satan and sins and scripture is clear that Christ did not BEAR everyone's sins or pay for everyone's sins in an EFFICACIOUS MANNER. It is obvious and clear to me that if Christ BORE everyone's sins no one would be judged for any sins including the sin of unbelief.

    I have posted thoroughly, clearly and honestly in this thread. I do NOT propose to defend my position, in this regard, any further in this thread. I have no further meaningful remarks to offer, present or make on these specific issues.Therefore, this is my last post in this particular thread. I do again thank Brandan and all concerned for your hospitality in allowing me to participate on this site. I will read with interest the comments of others.

    In closing, the practical difference between us is (and I can see Bob nodding in agreement):

    1. My position on DEFINITE ATONEMENT is essentially Infralapsarian and I know this will not escape your careful and critical scrutiny.

    2. My position on SPECIAL REDEMPTION and UNIVERSAL PURCHASE allows me to hold to a certain 'common grace' or a kindness, benelovence, general love and compassion that God shows to all people, reprobates included. It also allows me to hold to the "free offer of the gospel" with the certain knowledge that God does NOT in any way DIRECTLY PURPOSE EVIL OR HINDER GOOD.

    I believe I have spoken according to God's revealed will and word.

    May God bless you, In Christ Craig
    I believe I am ETERNALLY SECURE based on the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST! My faith is belief In Christ
    apart from works (Romans 4:5).

    "...for whatever is born of God conquers the world. And this is the victory that conquers the world, our faith. Who is it that conquers the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?"
    (1 John 5:4-5 NRSV)

  2. #122
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    This thread is becoming a thread about the scope of the atonement... I can't complain. This is more important than to try to prove if I gave a chocolate for an orphan in an orphanage and he believes that I gave it to everyone, then be believes that there must be two of me...

    When speaking about the scope of the atonement, or anything about the atonement for that matter, please, keep in mind its "shadow" in the Old Testament and ask yourself:

    What was the scope of the atonement in the O.T.? The Philistines? The Hittites? Ammorites? Hivites? Meteorites? Hepatitis? Conjunctivitis? No! The scope was specifically for the "elect" Jews. Why then the scope of the substance would be different in the N.T.?

    What is the other "shadow" in the O.T. that, now, we claim that the substance is different in its scope? We need to understand what happened in the O.T., the "shadow" in order to understand the "substance" in the N.T.

    Thanks!

    Milt
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  3. #123
    Administrator Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,138
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    19
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    15
    Thanked in
    8 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig kennedy View Post
    Hi Mary,

    I don't think you understand my position, actually!
    Actually Craig, I think we all do understand your perspective. We did the first time you left and the second. Nothing has changed, we get it. We just do not embrace a view of a god that is subservient in any way to his creation.

    1. My position on DEFINITE ATONEMENT is essentially Infralapsarian and I know this will not escape your careful and critical scrutiny.
    It's like I said, nothing's changed.

    2. My position on SPECIAL REDEMPTION and UNIVERSAL PURCHASE allows me to hold to a certain 'common grace' or a kindness, benelovence, general love and compassion that God shows to all people, reprobates included. It also allows me to hold to the "free offer of the gospel" with the certain knowledge that God does NOT in any way DIRECTLY PURPOSE EVIL OR HINDER GOOD.
    Craig, if God has predetermined all things, how does He allow or not allow certain things?

    Also, if:
    God does NOT in any way DIRECTLY PURPOSE EVIL OR HINDER GOOD
    Then how did it get there? Where did evil come from? Do you honestly believe that all things were not pre determined in the mind of God for His glory??

    I believe I have spoken according to God's revealed will and word.
    Let's explore those questions I asked and see if that is the case.
    Isaiah 45:7, (KJV), I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

  4. #124
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by GraceAmbassador View Post
    This thread is becoming a thread about the scope of the atonement... I can't complain. This is more important than to try to prove if I gave a chocolate for an orphan in an orphanage and he believes that I gave it to everyone, then be believes that there must be two of me...

    When speaking about the scope of the atonement, or anything about the atonement for that matter, please, keep in mind its "shadow" in the Old Testament and ask yourself:

    What was the scope of the atonement in the O.T.? The Philistines? The Hittites? Ammorites? Hivites? Meteorites? Hepatitis? Conjunctivitis? No! The scope was specifically for the "elect" Jews. Why then the scope of the substance would be different in the N.T.?

    What is the other "shadow" in the O.T. that, now, we claim that the substance is different in its scope? We need to understand what happened in the O.T., the "shadow" in order to understand the "substance" in the N.T.

    Thanks!

    Milt
    Well, I am quoting myself because I love talking to myself: at least I have someone intelligent to listen!

    When in the O.T. we see any hint that the "atonement" in the day of Atonement, the one performed by the priest, the blood of the animal, was "sufficient for the Philistine, Libertine, Lamborghini, Zuchini, Bikini" but efficacious only to the Jews?" Why the O.T. never hints the "sufficiency/efficacy" dichotomy?

    (I know, I should be a pitcher for the Slapper...)

    Milt
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  5. #125
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,304
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig kennedy View Post
    Hi Mary,

    I don't think you understand my position, actually!
    Actually I think you are right I dont understand... and now reading it, I still dont understand how you believe like this. I dont agree with it either... its too confusing. Its like you say only elect are saved on the Cross and only elect will believe... and yet you say Christ died for all the world, and bought even the false prophets.. but they wont ever believe, their not elect. Yet you say CHrist only died for the sins of the elect.. so what did He buy? Its really all confusing.. Im glad you understand it because I dont. And I dont think I ever will so you really dont have to respond... To me you contradict yourself.. your beliefs at least contradict themselves.. its like you hold on to some false ideas from those infralapsarian churches or even past arminism thought... and yet you do believe the Truth.. its just entagled in some other nonsense that doesn't make sense because its not True. Thats why it doesn't make sense to me... The Bible doesnt teach it. This idea about everyone being bought with the blood of Christ and yet only the Elect are is a contradition how I see it. Im sorry I just cant put my mind around your beliefs... The Bible is clear, and it should be simple...

    The most simple belief that is True is this, dont entangle false ideas with it: Christ died for the Sheep alone, He took only their sins, and made them not guilty anymore, right with God. Christ ATONED FOR THE SHEEPS SINS ALONE. God then opens elects eyes to believing This Truth that Christ saved them alone, and then teaches them of Truths. AMazing grace how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see. And all things that happen in the world are controlled by God, but people do make choices.. but the outcome of those choices, the thoughts during it, everything is controlled by God. Christ is our Shepherd and God is Sovereign over all. Its that simple... you confuse things with these other ideas that seem to me to contradict these blessed Truths.

    Its really quiet simple I dont understand when people make it complicated... God in His Word says He controls ALL things. And thus He does.. right now He has determined that I write these words, He just determined that I hit the backspace too. He determined that my eyes would be dry, that I would be up at 2:46 am responding to a thread because I love Him and His Word even though my back is in severe pain. He determined I would do the things I do, that I just scratched my head. He determined that I would choose to go to College for a masters in teaching. He determined that I would sleep in till noon today, even though I made the choice not to get out of bed.

    Its quite simple... God determins all things including Sin. There are so many verses on it but lets start another thread if want to discuss.

    Second its quiet SIMPLE... Christ died for the Sheep alone, Christ took on the sins of the Sheep, those Sheep were not guilty anymore and not going to be put to death for their sins. Instead they were made right with God. Christ didn't do anything for the nonelect, Christ do not care about the nonelect. Thats pretty simple a child could understand. Christ loves His brothers and sisters, and Christ laid down His life for them. All other people are still in their sins Christ didn't take their sins.

    Third, when the Sheep are alive on this earth.... they walk in darkness at first until God brings Light!!! They are blind but then God makes them see. And wow they see so much! They see that Christ died for them, took their sins, suffered for them so that they could be with God in Heaven for all eternity! They were once lost lil Sheep not within the Fold, wandering alone in the dark forest.. endulding in their sinful desires and flesh... but then alone comes the Sheperd Christ and He finds them! And He brings them back to the flock, and they are united with their brethren, with the Lord, with the Holy Spirit. the Spirit dwells in them, and they begin to understand all that God has done for them. God called them opened their eyes gave them grace, a gift of salvation!!! They love God so much but this love they never had before, this Love comes from God! All things come from God, and all things are controled by Him. And the Sheep rejoice in this Truth because they are assured that nothing will ever hurt them and nothing will be able to ever over power God, and that God will control all things so that all things work together FOR OUR GOOD because God loves us. And God will never allow anything to hurt us, or hinder us because God controls ALL the Evil in this world.

    THAT IS SIMPLE a blessed Truth. Its easy... why complicate it???? Course we are to press on towards the meat and not just the milk... but that doesn't mean believe in false ideas and pervert the Simple truth of the Gospel!!! That simple Truth should always stand and nothing should contradict it. Saying that Christ died for everyone, saying we have a free agency or will... that contradicts Gods truth.
    A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favour rather than silver and gold. - Wisdom

  6. #126
    Moderator Rlhuckle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Lockhart, tx
    Posts
    661
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    It is so very difficult for some folks to comprehend that God actually purposed what we (and He) call evil for the good of His elect--it (by antithesis) helps to bring them (and only them) to a knowledge of the grace and truth in Jesus Christ--which is the ultimate good for them (and only them)!

    God obviously could have done it differently, but this IS obviously the BEST way---else He WOULD have done it differently! God's plan and purpose is perfect!

    How can anybody "plunge themselves" into anything apart from God decreeing it to occur in eternity as part of His singular plan and purpose for creation? That doesn't make any sense at all......honest question....

  7. #127
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    boise
    Posts
    104
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by GraceAmbassador View Post
    This thread is becoming a thread about the scope of the atonement... I can't complain. This is more important than to try to prove if I gave a chocolate for an orphan in an orphanage and he believes that I gave it to everyone, then be believes that there must be two of me...

    When speaking about the scope of the atonement, or anything about the atonement for that matter, please, keep in mind its "shadow" in the Old Testament and ask yourself:

    What was the scope of the atonement in the O.T.? The Philistines? The Hittites? Ammorites? Hivites? Meteorites? Hepatitis? Conjunctivitis? No! The scope was specifically for the "elect" Jews. Why then the scope of the substance would be different in the N.T.?

    What is the other "shadow" in the O.T. that, now, we claim that the substance is different in its scope? We need to understand what happened in the O.T., the "shadow" in order to understand the "substance" in the N.T.

    Thanks!

    Milt
    Thank you Milt, that is wonderful.
    Col 2:9, (NASB), For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form

  8. #128
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Mary,

    2 peter 2:1

    If bought meant saved then the verse would be teaching the Son would lose some of those given to him by the Father, this of course is just the opposite of what the bible teaches.

    The Greek word for bought in this verse is not the same as the Greek words used to describe the work done by Christ on the Cross.
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  9. #129
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Boise,ID
    Posts
    6
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig kennedy View Post
    Actually, because of "time constraints" and work commitments I will ASSUME that Trav and others on this forum would like to hear further comment and explanation from me on my "take" on the 'extent of the Atonement'.

    As I have said before, this matter can only be resolved - in my opinion - by EXEGESIS and it has no connection at all to the ESSENTIAL ETERNAL DEITY OF CHRIST which I strongly affirm and confess!

    I have stressed that I am neither a Calvinist or an Arminian. I have no desire to "label" or "neatly box" my view into some human system or belief system. I take my beliefs and theological understanding only from the inerrant scriptures.

    I believe that Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross is SUFFICIENT FOR ALL PEOPLE but NOT EFFICACIOUS FOR ALL - and this is by God's Sovereign design and will, therefore it does not detract from His Divine Majesty in the least. Let me explain my position in a little more detail.

    It is my viewpoint, that it is correct to say that Christ BORE EFFICACIOUSLY only the sins of the Elect. I have no quibble with this concept, in and of itself. I think there is scriptural support for this position and in that scripture teaches this, I also gladly affirm it. Matthew 26:28 speaks of Christ dying, in the EFFICACIOUS SENSE, 'for many'; John 10:11, 15 speak of Christ BEARING AWAY EFFICACIOUSLY the sins of His sheep (and I agree NOT THE GOATS when speaking in this efficacious sense); John 17:9 Jesus intercedes in prayer FOR THE ONES GIVEN HIM, not everyone or the entire world of sinful humanity; Acts 20:28 and Ephesians 5:25-27 speak of the Church purchased by Christ, not all people - and please note that both Trav and Mary in their posts have alluded to this phenomena; Isaiah 53:12 is a prophecy that Christ's death on the Cross BORE THE SINS OF MANY (not all).

    I can, then, agree that in the sense I have argued above Christ's Atonement is DEFINITE IN ITS DESIGN AND APPLICATION! I have no problem with this whatsoever. The Atonement is EFFICACIOUS in securing the Salvation of ALL OF CHRIST'S ELECT.

    God's ELECTION of His people was not based on foreseen faith, human merit or any form of human obedience; NO! He chooses the Elect according to the kind intention of His will, see Ephesians 1:4-8 and Romans 9:11 for scriptural support here.

    However, God has to OVERCOME Original Sin in His Elect; therefore, He works with the Elect's "Natural Will" (NOT SYNERGISM HERE, you will understand) so that the Elect would be free to accept the CALL to salvation. The EXTERNAL CALL of the Gospel is PRESENTED TO ALL PEOPLE EVERYWHERE, however only the Elect are given the GIFT OF FAITH and consequently the MORAL ABILITY to Repent and Believe the Gospel!

    The Gospel is FREELY PROCLAIMED AND PRESENTED TO ALL PEOPLE by the DIRECTIVE WILL OF GOD! But the Elect alone are saved by the EFFICACIOUS CALL of the Spirit via God's DIRECTIVE WILL!

    My position, then, is that there is BOTH a 'particular' and a 'universal' aspect to the Atonement, the Gospel and its proclamation!

    There are texts that speak of this 'universal' aspect. They are, among others:

    Hebrews 2:9-10; 1 John 2:1-2; Rev 20:11-15; 2 Cor 5:14-15; 1 Timothy 2:5-6; 1 Timothy 4:10; Titus 2:11; 2 Peter 2:1.

    I am absolutely convinced that this is the truth on this matter. I am, therefore, neither a Calvinist or an Arminian; I only go as far as scripture reveals, no more and no less!

    Scripture, then, in my opinion teaches that Christ tasted death for everyone, thus demonstrating a certain general love, kindness and care for the entire world, the works of His hands. However, the same scriptures also teach that Christ, by God's infinite DESIGN AND PLAN bore - in the EFFICACIOUS sense - the sins of the elect alone!

    I have been entirely honest with you here WHAT I believe and WHY I believe as I do. May God bless you!

    In Christ, Craig
    In response to Craigs posting I disagree entirely with his view of "natural will" and "general love/kindness to all creation" seems he doesn't "generally love all of his creation (Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated). It is apparent he does not love the reprobate at all. But I can not deny what is said in the verses that he referenced. I am curious to see a response to Mary's question on 2 Peter 2:1 (aside from Craigs as I've already read it) and input on all of the others. It seems as if the scriptures claim Christ's death and purchase for everyone of the world in many of these (aside from Heb 2:9) not just the elect. I do not in any way deny Definate attonement as it is evident that the true Gospel only preaches this. But I am looking for an explanation of how these referenced verses and similar ones in scripture fit into it.

    I am new to this truth of the Gospel, introduced to it by my husband, Trav shortly after we met. I was raised in the typical "free-will" preachings and was thrown for a bit of a loop when given the truth of ultimate supremacy. I cling to it, but am still digesting the meat and appreciate any help with how the referenced verses fit in. Many thanks.
    1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached to the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

  10. #130
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    ATT: Those who don’t like the way I worded the opening post.
    The following statements should help clarify that my statements were not meant as prescriptive (something man must do) but as descriptive of saved people.
    Only those believing in the Jesus found in the Bible end up in heaven
    All elect people believe in the Jesus found in the Bible.
    All regenerated people believe in the Jesus found in the Bible.
    All justified people believe in the Jesus found in the Bible.
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  11. #131
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Wild West Arizona
    Posts
    344
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by GraceAmbassador View Post
    Well, I am quoting myself because I love talking to myself: at least I have someone intelligent to listen!
    hahaha good one ... I have had similar thoughts too about responding to self I love it!!

    Quote Originally Posted by GraceAmbassador View Post
    When in the O.T. we see any hint that the "atonement" in the day of Atonement, the one performed by the priest, the blood of the animal, was "sufficient for the Philistine, Libertine, Lamborghini, Zuchini, Bikini" but efficacious only to the Jews?" Why the O.T. never hints the "sufficiency/efficacy" dichotomy?

    (I know, I should be a pitcher for the Slapper...)

    Milt
    Your words are very well placed and actually should end the whole Jesus died for everyone silliness. As well as the other good points brought up by other hard core supra types like myself.
    It is what it is

  12. #132
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Saint Nicholas View Post
    Jim, I understand what you are trying to communicate, however the wording taken at face I tend to disagree with. Please allow me to explain.

    There is only ONE historical Jesus, not two or three or four or so on. All Christian sects acknowledge this one historical Jesus. Even them that deny the Trinity (Christology) and or Limited Atonement (Soteriology). Now I agree with the message you are trying to convey, however I feel you are going about this all wrong.

    It would be better in my opinion to just say they DENY, MISREPRESENT, DON'T UNDERSTAND, DEVALUE, FALSLEY REPRESENT, this One historical person Jesus. To say that in their misrepresentation they are creating a fourth, (or perhaps more) members of the Trinity, is not a sound argument.

    Again Jim, I admire your zeal, but your arguments can be better presented.

    In Love,
    Nicholas

    Nicholas,
    Thanks for the comments. The reason I came up with the idea of a fourth person to Trinity is because I used to use the argumentation you suggested, let me explain.
    That kind of argumentation never got anyone’s attention. It was dismissed with the argument that one’s view of the atonement is not that of an essential doctrine rising to the same level of one’s view of the trinity. It is an “in house debate” we are “brothers and sisters in Christ”.

    Instead of seriously dealing with the scriptures and arguments in defense of Limited Atonement, they would respond, we are both saved, so ones position on this issue is of no eternal consequence.

    I am more than open to any suggestion you or anyone else has for improving the language I use in presenting the case I tried to make in the first couple of post’s I wrote. No one has been able to prove that my premise is wrong only objected the way I have presented it.
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  13. #133
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Trav'sWife View Post
    In response to Craigs posting I disagree entirely with his view of "natural will" and "general love/kindness to all creation" seems he doesn't "generally love all of his creation (Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated). It is apparent he does not love the reprobate at all. But I can not deny what is said in the verses that he referenced. I am curious to see a response to Mary's question on 2 Peter 2:1 (aside from Craigs as I've already read it) and input on all of the others. It seems as if the scriptures claim Christ's death and purchase for everyone of the world in many of these (aside from Heb 2:9) not just the elect. I do not in any way deny Definate attonement as it is evident that the true Gospel only preaches this. But I am looking for an explanation of how these referenced verses and similar ones in scripture fit into it.

    I am new to this truth of the Gospel, introduced to it by my husband, Trav shortly after we met. I was raised in the typical "free-will" preachings and was thrown for a bit of a loop when given the truth of ultimate supremacy. I cling to it, but am still digesting the meat and appreciate any help with how the referenced verses fit in. Many thanks.
    A few quick points
    There are explanations for all the Scriptures that people think point to a universal atonement.
    All these verses are taken out of their biblical context. It helps to read some of the verses before and after each one of these “proof texts” to try see what was meant by the original authors.
    Looking up the Greek for these verses is also very helpful. For example one of the Greek definitions of the word all (pas in Greek) is “some of all types”
    If Jesus died to pay for the sins of all people that would mean their sins are paid for and there would be no reason for anyone not going to heaven. In other, all peoples sins paid for, then all people should be in heaven.
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  14. #134
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    295
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    My comments in quote are in red.

    Quote Originally Posted by WDJD View Post
    ATT: Those who don’t like the way I worded the opening post.
    The following statements should help clarify that my statements were not meant as prescriptive (something man must do) but as descriptive of saved people.
    Only those believing in the Jesus found in the Bible end up in heaven. Agree
    All elect people believe in the Jesus found in the Bible.
    Disagree. Unregenerate people do not believe in Jesus.
    All regenerated people believe in the Jesus found in the Bible.
    Disagree. See below.
    All justified people believe in the Jesus found in the Bible.
    Disagree. The Holy Spirit works regeneration and faith in Jesus by the outward hearing of God's word not by the finding of Jesus in the Bible. Regenerate/Justified people believe in a Jesus who is consistent with the Jesus of the Bible; however, belief in the Jesus found in the Bible is not essential for regeneration or justification.
    Throughout this thread, you have confused the prescriptive and the descriptive, the justified and the glorified, the call of God and the finding of Jesus in the Bible, and the soteriological and the Christological.

  15. #135
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Gerhard,
    ATT: Those who don’t like the way I worded the opening post.
    The following statements should help clarify that my statements were not meant as prescriptive (something man must do) but as descriptive of saved people.
    Only those believing in the Jesus found in the Bible end up in heaven. Agree
    All elect people believe in the Jesus found in the Bible.
    Disagree. Unregenerate people do not believe in Jesus.
    Me
    Ok, how about : All elect people will believe in the Jesus found in the bible.

    All regenerated people believe in the Jesus found in the Bible.
    Disagree. See below.
    All justified people believe in the Jesus found in the Bible.
    Disagree. The Holy Spirit works regeneration and faith in Jesus by the outward hearing of God's word not by the finding of Jesus in the Bible. Regenerate/Justified people believe in a Jesus who is consistent with the Jesus of the Bible; however, belief in the Jesus found in the Bible is not essential for regeneration or justification.
    Me
    I didn’t say a belief in the Jesus found in the bible was essential before one can be regenerated or justified , but that all regenerated and justified people believe in the Jesus found in the bible.
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  16. #136
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,304
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by WDJD View Post
    Mary,

    2 peter 2:1

    If bought meant saved then the verse would be teaching the Son would lose some of those given to him by the Father, this of course is just the opposite of what the bible teaches.

    The Greek word for bought in this verse is not the same as the Greek words used to describe the work done by Christ on the Cross.
    That makes sense, a very good and solid point I didn't really think of. I knew that bought didn't mean saved in this verse I just was confused on what it was saying... how God bought the false prophets. Thanks.
    A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favour rather than silver and gold. - Wisdom

  17. #137
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    OR
    Posts
    1,064
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by GraceAmbassador View Post
    This thread is becoming a thread about the scope of the atonement... I can't complain. This is more important than to try to prove if I gave a chocolate for an orphan in an orphanage and he believes that I gave it to everyone, then be believes that there must be two of me...

    When speaking about the scope of the atonement, or anything about the atonement for that matter, please, keep in mind its "shadow" in the Old Testament and ask yourself:

    What was the scope of the atonement in the O.T.? The Philistines? The Hittites? Ammorites? Hivites? Meteorites? Hepatitis? Conjunctivitis? No! The scope was specifically for the "elect" Jews. Why then the scope of the substance would be different in the N.T.?

    What is the other "shadow" in the O.T. that, now, we claim that the substance is different in its scope? We need to understand what happened in the O.T., the "shadow" in order to understand the "substance" in the N.T.

    Thanks!

    Milt
    Amen Milt. Even though the following verse is from a disputed book I find it's in harmony with the truth as revealed in scripture.

    Rev 5:9-10
    And they sang a new song, saying:

    “ You are worthy to take the scroll,
    And to open its seals;
    For You were slain,
    And have redeemed us to God by Your blood
    Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,
    10 And have made us kings and priests to our God;
    And we shall reign on the earth.”

    Not EVERY tribe, tongue, people and nation but OUT OF EVERY tribe, tongue, people and nation.


  18. #138
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by WDJD
    The Greek word for bought in this verse is not the same as the Greek words used to describe the work done by Christ on the Cross.
    This is simply not true. This word is used in a number places to speak of what Christ did on the cross.

    ESV 1 Corinthians 6:20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

    ESV 1 Corinthians 7:23 You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men.

    Revelation 14:3-4 And they sing a new song before the throne and before the four living beings and the elders; and no one was able to learn the song except the 144,000 who have been purchased from the earth. 4 These are those who were not polluted by women, for they are virgins. These are those who follow the Lamb wherever He goes. These were purchased by Jesus from among humanity as firstfruits to God and the Lamb.

    Quote Originally Posted by WDJD
    If bought meant saved then the verse would be teaching the Son would lose some of those given to him by the Father, this of course is just the opposite of what the bible teaches.
    I don't think that anyone is saying that bought means saved. In its full and complete sense salvation is still a future event. What some including myself would argue is that "bought" means that Jesus made atonement for these people. I'm guessing that you are referring to passages such as John 17:12 and John 18:9. Let's take a look at them.

    John 17:12 "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

    If this "gave me" has reference specifically to the atonement then your position has problems because that would mean that Jesus did die for Judas but Judas was lost. I think it more likely that Jesus is speaking specifically of the twelve and that all of the twelve but one remained in the faith.

    John 18:7-9 Then He asked them again, "Whom are you seeking?" And they said, "Jesus of Nazareth." 8 Jesus answered, "I have told you that I am He. Therefore, if you seek Me, let these go their way," 9 that the saying might be fulfilled which He spoke, "Of those whom You gave Me I have lost none."

    This passage seems to be speaking more of the disciples losing their physical lives. He sends them away so that they are not killed. There could be a tie in to spiritual salvation as well since some of them seem to have not believed until after the resurrection but in any case it seems to be referring specifically to the eleven remaining disciples.
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  19. #139
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    OR
    Posts
    1,064
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    John 6:35-40

    35 And Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. 40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”


  20. #140
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Wildboar
    You wrote,
    This is simply not true. This word is used in a number places to speak of what Christ did on the cross.

    ESV 1 Corinthians 6:20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

    ESV 1 Corinthians 7:23 You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men.
    Me
    In these two verses bought is used in relation to a price paid. No mention of a price paid in 2 Peter 2:1.
    The word bought we are referring to includes ownership after the purchase.
    In what sense did Jesus own these people you claim he bought?
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 7 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Notitia, Assensus, and Fiducia
    By Bob Higby in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-02-06, 05:30 PM
  2. Veneration of a Statue???
    By ashamoun in forum General Discussion Archive
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-16-05, 12:19 PM
  3. between brothers and sisters...
    By countrymouse in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-30-04, 03:12 PM
  4. Church Membership Courses
    By Alan Stevens in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-05-02, 06:30 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •