4486 | Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Was Christ "fully" human? | on: August 07, 2009, 12:00:09 PM |
Shalom, beacon2. Whom did Christ die for on the Cross? Contrary to what the Calvinists teach, the Messiah died for all human beings. If He did NOT die for all, then how can He judge those who reject His substitutiary death as their Sacrifice for sin? Did He die for all or just the elect? His substitutiary death was for all; the PAYMENT FOR SIN accomplished by His death was only applied to the elect. What sins did He pay for? He died for them all. Did He pay for them in full? Yes, His death was sufficient to pay for all of them in full, hence His cry from the cross, “Tetelestai!” “It is finished!” “It is paid in full!” It’s the word that was stamped on a bill once the buyer finished his payments. or do we still owe something to God in order to be forgiven? As in confession, repentance, etc. No, there is nothing that we must add, nor is there anything we COULD add to the finished work of Yeshua` the Messiah. “Confession” is simply agreeing with God that we are indeed sinners and that our actions are sins. “Repentance” is simply changing our minds about our needs. It’s doing a 180-degree-turn and coming to an end of ourselves. In the Messiah’s love, Roy Hi Roy, I thought I'd address the other answers you had on your post of Aug 5th .... hope you don't mind that I copied the part of your answer that was most direct in answering the questions I posed. We pretty much see the same things in the scriptures judging by the answers you gave to some of the questions, except on your statement that I highlighted in red. Your position that Christ's death was only applied to the elect is the Reformed stance, and it is a teaching that is not supported by scripture. If you believe that Christ died for all men and there is nothing that men have to add to pay for their sin, how can it be then that the Father did not honor Christ's full payment and instead only applied part of it to some--the elect? Where does it say that?? b2 |
||
|
|
|
4489 | Forums / Theology Forum / Re: TRUE COMMUNION | on: August 07, 2009, 09:53:05 AM | |||||||||||||||||||||
If God alone is to be exalted then where does
that leave us with one another? Well this is very difficult to
understand since we are made to be in fellowship with one another. But
even tho there seemingly is a tension here about how we view other men
and our propensity to make idols, yet i believe that there are holistic
views of how God deals with us in light of the hidden corruption in the
depths of our souls. I think that Gods primary work is this method of
incisions and excisions. Because in the view of the sovereign movement
of the disposition of God we cannot judge the cause of a persons
particular corruption at the root of the image of the idol. This is why
we have a world view that is predominately supernatural and not a
progressive deterministic succession of falling into patterns of
corruption. The human soul is not defined by what we can see but it is
predominately deeper than we could fathom in all of the causes of these
corrupted behaviors.
We live in a world where Gods seeing, touching, and speaking are a communication in the method of incisions and excisions. This is why there seems to be no reason for how troubles of this world have built into them the paradigm of this cause of anthropomorphic mystery. God examines in this method. Every living thing is changing from one moment to the next. Let me apply this. In talking with the modern day Palagian the basic communication is this. "I do not like your God , somehow i must have some kind of autonomy. I have developed a language to express this." In other words the underlying communication is that "God is not like you say He is therefore i am god." Now then we are filters. All religion is built on developing a way to get to God instead of God coming down to man. There is very sophisticated ways in the way we have been able to oppose Gods method of supernatural and holistic communication to every problem. The primary method of healing is in the communication itself. These methods of war fare are mainly filtering through the child like opposition ... as if your child developed a language that opposed your language in order to be the adult. So its being able to filter the false proposition in a multi language epistemology that will be the convincing transformation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No comments:
Post a Comment