ECT Modern boredom and the historic issue of Jesus as Messiah

Right Divider

Body part
It's not horrible, but there needs to be a statement that God deliberates painfully about relegating some people to destruction. He always starts by wanting all to believe. Also, it is absolutely correct that it is not based on race. This is manifest in the NT, and is usually dropped by D'ists.
You're so fixated on your fairy tale that you don't even bother to know what some are saying before you jump into to make a spectacle of yourself.

Nang's horrible doctrine is that God created some for damnation and that God will not allow them to be saved. Supposedly, in His sovereignty, He created some to be blinded BY HIM so that they cannot believe and be saved.

According to their doctrine, there really is NO need to preach at all. Because God had already decided, in a predetermined way before all of creation, who will be saved and who will be damned.

They will dance around that, for sure.

But being the moron that you are, you have to make this about "D'ism".
 

Danoh

New member
It's word soup served up by a self-serious flailing verbal spastic. Hard to follow, harder to digest and very messy.

In short, unless a thing is spoonfed you, it ends up perceived by one such as you...hard to follow, etc.

:chuckle:

Nevertheless, Rom. 5:8
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
You're so fixated on your fairy tale that you don't even bother to know what some are saying before you jump into to make a spectacle of yourself.

Nang's horrible doctrine is that God created some for damnation and that God will not allow them to be saved. Supposedly, in His sovereignty, He created some to be blinded BY HIM so that they cannot believe and be saved.

According to their doctrine, there really is NO need to preach at all. Because God had already decided, in a predetermined way before all of creation, who will be saved and who will be damned.

They will dance around that, for sure.

But being the moron that you are, you have to make this about "D'ism".





Sometimes people and even Biblical passages say that but they MEAN that the person has had a fair chance to respond. If he is saying even from before birth, you are right. But even Rom 9:22 etc is said after they had a chance. How many chances did Pharoah have? Even the expression hardening implies a process that takes time.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
The relation to D'ism was about the belief that out of nowhere God would suddenly use DNA Israel to do things. He doesn't. He does all things through response to the Gospel. What Christ accomplished is no longer bypassed; everything is in relation to what people say about the Son. Wrath on those who reject; mercy on those who shelter in Him.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
The relation to D'ism was about the belief that out of nowhere God would suddenly use DNA Israel to do things. He doesn't. He does all things through response to the Gospel. What Christ accomplished is no longer bypassed; everything is in relation to what people say about the Son. Wrath on those who reject; mercy on those who shelter in Him.

Made up. Believe your Bible.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Made up. Believe your Bible.
The "grammar scholar" loves to hear himself talk.

I would appear that he, like many here on TOL, believe that God spent ~3 thousand years working with Israel just so that Jesus could be born (and, of course, die for the sins of the world).

It's a shame that they don't just believe ALL that the Bible says about Gods plans for Israel and the body of Christ.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
So God wants all men to be saved, but does not allow some to be saved.

That would be a logical contradiction, and God does not contradict Himself.

Such is not my belief.

I believe that every single soul that God wills to be saved, will be drawn to faith in Jesus Christ. John 6:39-44

Salvation according to the will and grace of God is 100% certain, for Christ is the "Surety" of God's better Covenant. Hebrews 7:22

Your doctrine is horrible.

I am a student of Covenant Theology which is the direct opposite of Dispensationalism.

So I consider your doctrine, that the cross work of Christ is only a possibility of salvation, rather than the Surety of salvation, to be fruit of the spirit of anti-Christ.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
So I consider your doctrine, that the cross work of Christ is only a possibility of salvation, rather than the Surety of salvation, to be fruit of the spirit of anti-Christ.

Because having not studied Leviticus, you do not understand that payment for sins, and the taking away of sins are two different events.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
Because having not studied Leviticus, you do not understand that payment for sins, and the taking away of sins are two different events.

Amusing,

I have been studying Leviticus for almost 45 years.

And it is my opinion you are seriously wrong about the above. . .

You really should read and study the Book to the Hebrews.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
Opinion noted.

Passover (cross) and Day of Atonement (taking away of sins) were months apart.

Both feasts point to (and promise) Christ's eventual death on the cross.

Which occurred in the fullness of time, so the temporal and earthly timing of the various feasts and rituals established by Moses are irrelevant, for they all point in purpose, to the same Person and one-time Event that was fulfilled in the sacrificial Incarnation of Jesus Christ.
 

Eagles Wings

New member
Both feasts point to (and promise) Christ's eventual death on the cross.

Which occurred in the fullness of time, so the temporal and earthly timing of the various feasts and rituals established by Moses are irrelevant, for they all point in purpose, to the same Person and one-time Event that was fulfilled in the sacrificial Incarnation of Jesus Christ.

Amen!
 

Right Divider

Body part
I am a student of Covenant Theology which is the direct opposite of Dispensationalism.
I see your problem. You prefer theology over truth.

So I consider your doctrine, that the cross work of Christ is only a possibility of salvation, rather than the Surety of salvation, to be fruit of the spirit of anti-Christ.
You are wrong again. Christ will SURELY save all those that believe.
 
Top