Posted on 01/20/2002 5:02:48 PM PST by CCWoody
Hmmm!
Hebrews 10:14-17 For by one offering He hath perfected for ever those who are [being] sanctified.Of this the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us; for after He had said before, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more."
Romans 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law, no flesh shall be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.This kinda puts you right back into being dead in sin.
I wanted to answer Doc’s questions in post #73. I did this mostly as a learning exercise for myself. This is not a criticism of Doc. I hope you find value in it, even if you disagree with it.
Have you ever thought about the different ways the Lord speaks to you? His voice does not always come from expected sources. I encourage everyone to listen carefully to opposing viewpoints regardless of your theological position.
I am not Calvinist. I am not an Arminian. I can’t confine myself to any particular “man-made” theology. If I had to say, I’m probably somewhere between a Calvinist and a Dispensationalist. I encourage everyone to not let any theology come between you and Christ. If all these debates over theology confuse you or wear on you go to Galatians and read what Paul says about living in the freedom of Christ.
Now to the questions:
“There were people who were already physically dead and beyond even the possibility of salvation when Christ did His atoning work. In what saving sense did He die for them in particular?”
The statement seems to be saying that those who died before Christ could not be saved. I don’t agree. Salvation is the same throughout history. The timing of Christ’s death on the cross is irrelevant. God’s Grace has been displayed in every age. The basis of salvation in every age is the death of Christ. Those who were physically dead before Christ’s death were saved or not saved by God’s grace through faith according to God’s revelation. Scriptural evidence: God gave the promise of Christ to Abraham. Abraham had faith in this revelation and was saved by God’s grace. Genesis 15:1-6 and Romans 4:18-25
So Christ’s atoning work was also for those who lived and died prior to his time. See also Habakkuk 2:1-4.
From Henry’s commentary on Habakkuk:
Synopsis: - Habakkuk must wait in faith. (1-4)
”He will rest his soul on the promise, and on Christ, in and through whom it is given. Thus he walks and works, as well as lives by faith, perseveres to the end, and is exalted to glory; while those who distrust or despise God's all-sufficiency will not walk uprightly with him. The just shall live by faith in these precious promises, while the performance of them is deferred. Only those made just by faith, shall live, shall be happy here and for ever.”
“And what about post-Calvary folks in the jungles of New Guinea? What will happen to them in particular if they never even hear the gospel message of the New Testament?”
If they never hear the Gospel message then they are lost, but the failure is theirs, not God’s. God reveals his truth to all men (by the Great Commission, by conscience, by creation, and by many other agents), but men everywhere suppress that truth. The man in the jungles of New Guinea is inexcusable. (Rom 1:20).
God’s judgment of the people past and present who are “untold” is based not on their response to unrevealed truth but to their lack of response to what they have received.
The “untold” man in the middle of the Amazon or the heart of Los Angeles is not simply innocent or misinformed. Their fall is willful. God’s judgment is warranted and true. (Rom 2:1–3)
In other words, in what sense did Christ die to save them in particular if the Omnipotent Spirit of Almighty God is not pleased to GET the missionaries ALL THE WAY out in the middle of nowhere to present the message of the gospel to them in particular?
The value of Christ’s death is unchanged. The power of Christ’s death is not diminished by the absence of missionaries. The “untold” are responsible and are not innocent.
(This is not an argument against evangelism. On the contrary, the Great Commission is highly important.)
How can the Third Person of the Trinity be said to be committed to the salvation of these folks in particular if He does not pull out all stops to get the gospel message to them in particular?
The Lord has “pulled out all the stops” to reveal his plan to the world. He does stop short of forcing men to accept the revelation. Every person has sufficient knowledge to be held liable for sin. In Romans, Paul gives the explanations and reasons for man’s inexcusable state.
”No matter how isolated a man may be from the revelation of God’s righteousness in the gospel of Jesus Christ, that man is entirely without excuse. The wrath of God is on him because of his ungodliness and unrighteousness, not because of his lack of faith in Christ.” –J. Ronald Blue
And if the Second Person of the Trinity died to save them in particular, how come the Third Person of God is not always clearly and dynamically interested in saving them in particular?
I see no reason to think this. The Lord is always, clearly, dynamically interested in saving man. His judgment is his and his alone and should not be seen as a lack of interest in saving us. We are all already under condemnation. That the Lord provides a way for any of us to escape his wrath is powerful evidence. I would not accuse him of lack of interest.
It is implied in these questions that the value of Christ’s atonement is connected to results of man’s salvation. That is, if someone is not saved then Christ’s atonement had no value. I don’t agree. Man does not determine the value of Christ’s atonement. Man cannot decrease the value of the atonement by rejecting Christ. God set the value of Christ’s atonement. It cannot be diminished.
Peace in Christ,
JWinNC
Nicely put. To which I might add: "It is finished!"
I freely confess that this sentence caught my eye, and that having read it, I decided not to read the rest.
JW, you have never grasped anything of importance on these threads. My statement does NOT "seem to be saying that those who died before Christ could not be saved."
You are trying to evade the theological issue. This is what you always do on these threads.
Maybe Jerry or OP or some of the others will engage you in a debate, but I won't. My #73 still stands. You haven't answered it. You have only pretended to answer it.
If you want to disparage me, that's fine you go right ahead.
If I misrepresented your first question, I apologize. I tried to be accurate. As to the rest, you shouldn't claim that I did not answer the questions if you did not read it.
I'm not going to debate you either. That's not my goal.
We all learn from the sharing.
Peace,
JWinNC
OR.... not.
I could "share" with you the contents of the local garbage dump, but it wouldn't feed your stomach. At best, it would make you sick; at worst, it would poison you.
Some of the doctrine on these threads will feed your soul... and some is rotted crap, which surely won't.
There is no inherent virtue in "sharing", only in the sharing of Absolute Truth.
In which case, it is the duty of the Sharers to Share... and of the Listeners, to Listen.
This stuff matters.
I'm in perfect agreement with you so long as one's theology is not put ahead of Christ.
Peace,
JW
Good Theology is the Love of Jesus Christ.
We pay our respects to the Man by attending to what He said.
The Sermon on the Mount was one part of that... all 100% true (of course), all noble, all good.
But He said a lot more than that. Also 100% Infallible, every Word.
And if we Love Him, it behooves us to listen and get it right.
Theology is Loving God.
Note that I did not say, "Loving God is the definition of Good Theology".
What I just said is, "Good Theology is the definition of Loving God".
Romans 2: 6 God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[1] 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8 But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9 There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11 For God does not show favoritism. 12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15 since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.
The Lord is righteous. He provides a way for all to have an opportunity. Then they decide what to do with that opportunity.
Feel free to continue arguments here or move over to a new thread...
xzins, I am not disputing the Free Offer of the Gospel. Romans 3 does tell us what men do with the opportunity.
As I have stated before, don't quit reading in Chapter Two. You must continue into Chapter Three (and beyond) if you are going to get the slightest clue as to what Paul is doing. (In reality, the book of Romans is the most sublime theological treatise ever written. It is important to follow the chain of Paul's logical development, and you don't do that by "proof texting".)
See how he builds on Chapter Two in Chapter Three, and shows that the natural theology he presented in Chapter One is insufficient for salvation.
(Folks, once again it if Friday, and once again I will be off FR at least until Monday.)
Romans3: 21 - But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,[9] through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished-- 26 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. 27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.
21 Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,"[5] and he was called God's friend. 24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.
I believe James' view speaks a truth that is less obvious in Paul's Romans passage, and that Paul's passage speaks truth that is less obvious in James' passage. But, since the bible cannot contradict itself, these must come together.
They come together in Jesus' often misunderstood passage about giving a cup of water to one who believes in him. (Somehow that is interpreted as being a nice water-giver to impoverished folks.) Jesus' actual words were: Mark 9:41 Mark 9 Mark 9:40-42 I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.
In other words, our actions can demonstrate on whose side we wish to be, that is, what we believe.
During WWII, the French underground silently pretended through the day to be on the side of the Vichy French government. During the night, they supported the cause of the Free French and of Charles DeGaulle and the Allies. Their actions demonstrated on whose side they truly wished to be.
In the same way, while none of us is righteous by our works, there are many who "SPEAK" via their actions about what they truly believe. And "whosoever believeth in him will not perish, but have everlasting life" and "Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness." Those two principals are still in effect today: one for those who hear of Jesus, and the other for those who, like Jethro and Abraham and Melchizadek see the law of God in God's creation.
James was a book that Martin Luther wanted to throw out of the Bible; he called it a "book of straw."
As you know, I really don't have time to deal with your post now (just as I know that you will probably not be able to get back to this before Monday yourself). Suffice it to say that I do have one question: Do you belive that Abraham was responding to natural revelation alone? Scripture documents an extensive interaction with God, a more specific revelation made to him than your post shows.
I believe it dirtied his spirit.
Luther was aggravated over having to deal with Papists who couldn't, wouln't, grasp the fact that James 2 was theologically subordinated to Romans 3 and 4. And in his aggravation, he sometimes said things he shouldn't have said.
But so do you.
Some of Luther's very best, warmest sermons are on the Book of James. You have completely overlooked that, because it doesn't support your bias against Luther's predestinarian position.
That has nothing to do with it. It has to do with Luther's rabid hatred of the Jews.
This doesn't fit your charges against him.
Please understand that I am not excusing Luther. I just think you may have gotten a slightly skewed impression of him.
So, I don't think you need to be "warning people" overly much about Luther. (If you want to do so, I will warn people about John Wesley [grin].)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.