|
|
Post by And Such Were Some Of You on Nov 28, 2008 16:19:49 GMT -5
Krazee,
Help me connect the two. How is this scripture explained when it comes to the limited atonement issue?
This is the one I find difficult to grasp. From here though, I may have more questions (hope you don't mind).
Thanks,
Monica (ASWSOY)
|
|
|
|
Post by krazeeboi on Nov 29, 2008 23:31:36 GMT -5
There are actually several explanations put forth to interpret John 3:16 in light of Reformed theology. The one that I prefer is that "world" within this scripture does not refer to individual persons, but rather to Gentiles included with Jews. This would have been revolutionary for the Jewish hearer, to hear that the Messiah would not limit salvation to only Jews, but that He would also extend it to Gentiles. John was saying simply that God's love had been extended to additional people groups — not that individual Gentiles could not be saved before, but that the gospel call had not been issued to the Gentiles nations at large. |
|
|
|
Post by And Such Were Some Of You on Nov 30, 2008 12:36:23 GMT -5
Thanks for the link, I will check it out.
I was moreso talking about the word "whosoever". I am learning the basics of the reformed faith because I am truly believing that the bible supports such - however there are some scriptures that I am having a bit of a problem with - John 3:16 is the one that catches me as it concerns limited atonement and the elect.
I appreciate your patience while I am in the learning phase.
|
|
|
|
Post by krazeeboi on Nov 30, 2008 19:19:24 GMT -5
Oh no problem. I don't claim to have reconciled everything with the Reformed view, but I have definitely accepted the basic premises of the doctrine. As far as the "whosoever" part of John 3:16, it doesn't present a problem for Reformed theology. The scripture doesn't preclude God from spefically calling certain individuals to faith. Regardless of how few people are enabled to respond to the gospel, it is still true that whoever believes will be saved. Therefore, it is not necessary that everyone be able to respond positively to the gospel in order for the "whosoever" nature of it to be true. I also found this explanation in the linked article interesting: No word for"whoever" exists in the Greek text. A literal interpretation of the Greek is "all the believers," not "whoever believes" (the same is true in John 3:15). This verse would read more accurately as: "God ... gave His only begotten son, that all the believers in Him should not perish."1 In other words, the Greek text makes it clear that Jesus did not come to save just anyone, but that he came to save a definite, specific group of people identified as believers. Since the identity of the elect/believers was foreordained by God, the text teaches that God gave his Son in order to save those people whom he had already chosen to believe, and that this group of elect individuals could be identified by their belief. It also affirms that belief is the means which God has ordained by which to save the elect. |
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Nov 30, 2008 20:37:28 GMT -5
Oh no problem. I don't claim to have reconciled everything with the Reformed view, but I have definitely accepted the basic premises of the doctrine.
As far as the "whosoever" part of John 3:16, it doesn't present a problem for Reformed theology. The scripture doesn't preclude God from spefically calling certain individuals to faith. Regardless of how few people are enabled to respond to the gospel, it is still true that whoever believes will be saved. Therefore, it is not necessary that everyone be able to respond positively to the gospel in order for the "whosoever" nature of it to be true. I also found this explanation in the linked article interesting:
No word for"whoever" exists in the Greek text. A literal interpretation of the Greek is "all the believers," not "whoever believes" (the same is true in John 3:15). This verse would read more accurately as: "God ... gave His only begotten son, that all the believers in Him should not perish."1 In other words, the Greek text makes it clear that Jesus did not come to save just anyone, but that he came to save a definite, specific group of people identified as believers. Since the identity of the elect/believers was foreordained by God, the text teaches that God gave his Son in order to save those people whom he had already chosen to believe, and that this group of elect individuals could be identified by their belief. It also affirms that belief is the means which God has ordained by which to save the elect . [/blockquote][/quote] Are you saying we should leave out, whosoever? That don't make any sense to me .... It just like taking the Word of God and making it fit your doctrine... why change believes or believeth into belevers.... Can you changed a verb into a noun?  In John 3:16.. it is used as a verb, not a noun... Believeth .. GR word is Pisteno mean to have faith (in, upon, or with respect to a person or thing; to entrust; one's spiritual well being to Christ; believe; put trust in with... Jesus only came to save the believers? I thought you became a believer after you are saved. Why should we bother to go to church, evangelize, or do anything... if we know we are chosen and can not fall away from Christ. Why did Jesus give the Great Commission... when God already chosen who He want and already rejected who He don't want? Confusing!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by And Such Were Some Of You on Nov 30, 2008 20:47:53 GMT -5
Sister AT,
At first I also found it confusing but as I read the Word, I find that it really is not as confusing as we make it.
If the word "whosoever" was never really in the Greek text - then it is not a matter of changing a verb into a noun but that the word was never there as either a verb or a noun but was ADDED.
If this is the case, then it actually makes sense. It is not saying that Jesus came to save the believers but that those who believe will have eternal life.
We must evangelize because we don't know who the chosen are and therefore we cannot afford to say - "well, I am not going to try to witness to you because God already knows if you are chosen or not!" It is because we don't know then we must continue on in the Great Commission.
The elect has nothing to do with us, but everything to do with HIM! I am sure Krazee can break it down much better than I can, but for me, it is all falling into place.
|
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Dec 1, 2008 0:26:37 GMT -5
Sister AT, At first I also found it confusing but as I read the Word, I find that it really is not as confusing as we make it. If the word "whosoever" was never really in the Greek text - then it is not a matter of changing a verb into a noun but that the word was never there as either a verb or a noun but was ADDED. If this is the case, then it actually makes sense. It is not saying that Jesus came to save the believers but that those who believe will have eternal life. We must evangelize because we don't know who the chosen are and therefore we cannot afford to say - "well, I am not going to try to witness to you because God already knows if you are chosen or not!" It is because we don't know then we must continue on in the Great Commission. The elect has nothing to do with us, but everything to do with HIM! I am sure Krazee can break it down much better than I can, but for me, it is all falling into place. No... God so LOVE the world.... His love is not limited to certain ppl... He love all mankind.. He not willing for any to perish... but ALL should come to repentance... II Peter 3:9 atonement is limited? the blood is limited too? don't make sense to be..... YES... it is confusing whne you take the Word of God and try to make it fit your doctrine... God will not reject anyone who is willing to believe on Christ. |
|
|
|
Post by And Such Were Some Of You on Dec 1, 2008 0:40:04 GMT -5
I don't see where anyone is trying to take the Word to fit a particular doctrine.
To use the scripture that you did speaking that He doesn't wish for any to perish - yet we know that some do. How do you explain that since ALL does not come to repentance?
I also do not believe that one can come to Christ unless the Spirit draws him. And if the Spirit is drawing, then what is that saying? Man cannot come to the Lord on his own "free will".
|
|
|
|
Post by kanyon on Dec 1, 2008 2:44:13 GMT -5
annointed teacher, you make an iteresting statement. "God will not reject anyone who is willing to believe on Christ."
Thing is, a dead man cannot receive Christ unless he is enabled or called of the Spirit. A dead man is not willing to do anything...he's just dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Dec 1, 2008 15:48:47 GMT -5
I don't see where anyone is trying to take the Word to fit a particular doctrine. When you change the context and meaning of the scripture and the words to fit what you believe it should be.... is a problem He give everyone an opportunity to either accept or reject... One of the most outstandng gift God gave to mankind is FREEWILL I've rejected God many time before I finally gave in and accept Him... Even when the Spirit drew a person, thy still operating in FREEWILL, because they can reject Him or accept Him. All He do is presents Jesus to us..... God do not make ppl love Him and He did not make us as robot... He give us ability to reason and think on our own... Even with the Holy Spirit convicting us and pulling us toward Christ... He do not force us and it is up to us to make a decision. |
|
|
|
Post by And Such Were Some Of You on Dec 1, 2008 17:54:23 GMT -5
I don't see anyone changing the text of the scripture. Maybe I am missing something.
|
|
