tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post9143275681462596979..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: Particular redemption: some opening thoughtsPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger68125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-18554348905598616302012-06-15T21:00:06.221-07:002012-06-15T21:00:06.221-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Nonnahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02452040267177962781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-65045428243161313172012-06-15T19:37:11.396-07:002012-06-15T19:37:11.396-07:00I have two questions: 1) how could God justly plac...I have two questions: 1) how could God justly place the blood of the nonelect on my hands (Eze 33:1-9)holding me responsible for their damnation if I had no part to play in the process, the Father did not elect them, the Son did not die for them, and the H.S. will never go to them and quicken them? 2) Why did God choose the children in Deut 10:15? Was it not because of His love for their fathers? And why did God not choose the children in Matt 23:37? Was it not because their fathers would not?Marty Summershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14925347433421691898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-91837359196483014022012-06-15T15:23:25.405-07:002012-06-15T15:23:25.405-07:00Thank you for this post. Very well written and th...Thank you for this post. Very well written and thoughtfully presented. I agree with you 100% on this as it is a point of conversation with many people. Most of the times, it is with people who do not read their bibles. Thank you for your ministry and your blog! I have been away too long!pastorbrianculverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07325788116682801754noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-65627922736921181932012-06-15T14:38:36.350-07:002012-06-15T14:38:36.350-07:00@Stephen,
Well, this is a blog after all (so I mu...@Stephen,<br /><br />Well, this is a blog after all (so I must write in soundbytes unfortunately), and a hostile environment at that. I have had comments for my students in the past as well (as far as grammar is concerned). And since we are on the topic of grammar, that's exactly my point; there is an informing theological grammar at play here, and one that your more better writer Dan needs to be more apparent about. What I mean is that there is a history to what Dan is simply asserting as <i>Biblical</i> (i.e. 5 Point Calvinism), and he needs to inform his uninformed readership of this history. That would go along way in trying to communicate the theology he is communicating; it would allow his readership to better adjudicate their affirmation or denial of what he is asserting. When someone collapses a system of interpretation into the Bible and says and makes no distinction between the two; then the situation has been set such that if someone (like me) disagrees with Dan I am no longer just disagreeing with Dan (or his system of interpretation), but now I am disagreeing with the Bible. And you are trying to tell me that Dan's writing is good! Anyone can cross t's and dot i's, but can they employ those letters in words, sentences and paragraphs that provide a more fair and accurate and bigger picture of the deep realities that, in our instance, Dan is trying to communicate? <br /><br />So please, teacher, don't lecture me ... your <i>insult</i> is duly noted by the way. I'm glad my book editors didn't seem to study grammar where you did. But I understand your cloaked ad hominen, Stephen. Good one.Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-89404187596942906252012-06-15T14:21:44.415-07:002012-06-15T14:21:44.415-07:00@Chantry,
I'm not Amyrauldian, I'm an Eva...@Chantry,<br /><br />I'm not Amyrauldian, I'm an <a href="https://wipfandstock.com/store/Evangelical_Calvinism_Essays_Resourcing_the_Continuing_Reformation_of_the_Church" rel="nofollow"><i>Evangelical Calvinist</i></a>. And just because I disagree with 5 Point Calvinism doesn't mean I'm "angry," it just means I'm disagreeable with 5 Point Calvinism and those who presume that it is straightforward Gospel Truth. It does frustrate me though when people, like DJP, articulate something as if it's Gospel truth and at the same time does not inform his "students" that there is a history of development to what has become known as 5 Point Calvinism. That is irresponsible, not Christian, and not being a person who traffics in the truth! <br /><br />Please don't misrepresent who I am by calling me an Amyrauldian, that's presumptuous and again not Christian. And please don't say I am angry when I'm not; I simply disagree. Your framing of things has rhetorical force by pigeonholing me as something that I'm not---Angry & Amyrauldian (ooh sounds like a good book title for an Amyrauldian that is)---but there is no substance to it.Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-30736668738704315622012-06-15T09:38:27.631-07:002012-06-15T09:38:27.631-07:00Sorry, the reference is to v. 4.
Off-topic... loo...Sorry, the reference is to v. 4.<br /><br />Off-topic... looks like I just got a prophetic message from Blogger: My word verification is "boonyear 58"<br /><br />(I'm kidding.)Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11254920985242767984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-67373744952084355742012-06-15T08:44:10.731-07:002012-06-15T08:44:10.731-07:00The issue became a lot simpler for me when I stopp...The issue became a lot simpler for me when I stopped trying to answer the rhetorical question of Rom 8:32.trogdorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11452996348717802065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-10676378419133692562012-06-15T08:38:37.805-07:002012-06-15T08:38:37.805-07:00You can look at Isaiah 5:1-6, particularly v. 5: &...You can look at Isaiah 5:1-6, particularly v. 5: "<b>What more could have been done to My vineyard<br />That I have not done in it?</b> Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, did it bring forth wild grapes?"Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11254920985242767984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-53057560835906191442012-06-15T08:04:46.190-07:002012-06-15T08:04:46.190-07:00Tommy: thanks, very grateful if it's of use to...Tommy: thanks, very grateful if it's of use to you.<br /><br />Tom: since you're just repeating yourself, I'll just refer you to my previous reply.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-92148639113568627922012-06-15T08:00:22.797-07:002012-06-15T08:00:22.797-07:00...I see what you did there Dan!
Thank you for a ......I see what you did there Dan!<br /><br />Thank you for a great, incredibly helpful post. I've made the point that the apostles never evangelized by saying, "Christ died for your sins" to my Free Grace father-in-law(who's a pastor), and he had to concede that it's not necessary in the gospel offer(at least I got that much out of him).<br /><br />This will be a great tool to show my wife, who sees the validity and Biblical nature of the other points, but has a hard time with that darn L.Tommyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17533082006299313005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-84240814928480190412012-06-15T07:52:31.983-07:002012-06-15T07:52:31.983-07:00Still, I see what God is doing in Hebrews 6:4-5 to...Still, I see what God is doing in Hebrews 6:4-5 to be the same as 2 Cor 4:6. If that work doesn't render someone "saveable", then I don't know what does.<br /><br />And if it leads me to believe that Christ's plan for mankind has been thwarted, then my understanding of God's plan is wrong in some area.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11254920985242767984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-49443379728204897982012-06-15T06:15:21.215-07:002012-06-15T06:15:21.215-07:00Same response to you, Marty, as my last to Tom.Same response to you, Marty, as my last to Tom.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-26564981672366570072012-06-15T05:20:55.463-07:002012-06-15T05:20:55.463-07:00Tom: I see no problem in Jesus dying especially fo...Tom: <i>I see no problem in Jesus dying especially for the church but also making some people who will never believe "saveable"</i><br /><br />Someday, I'll write a post that makes and explains the Biblical case as to why that makes absolutely no sense whatever and is completely untenable nonsense.<br /><br />When that post comes out, please read it through, think it through carefully, and consider the Scriptures I provide.<br /><br />I'm thinking of giving it the title "Particular redemption: some opening thoughts."<br /><br />Watch for it.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-89937666728206981082012-06-15T05:00:01.294-07:002012-06-15T05:00:01.294-07:00There are valid reasons for my perspective. First ...There are valid reasons for my perspective. First let me say there is nothing "iffy" in God's plan of salvation. Do I believe in Limited Atonement? Yes in the design of the cross but no in the requirements of the cross. Like I alluded to a good engineer will write a requirement spec such that there are no limits. Would God tie His own hands with such an important aspect of His plan? Let me throw a coule more things for you to consider. I often say "our prayer won't change what will be but what will be was most assuredly affected by our prayer." I am arguing against the age-old robbot accusation from a sovereign grace perspective. What about Unconditional Election? Do I believe in it? Yes. However I believe the election is unconditional for the one being elected. That does not make their election unconditional upon anything else. The one being chosen had absolutely nothing to do with influencing God to choose him but that doesn't mean those around him who are already quickened didn't. See 2Chr 7:14 among others. God is factoring in the free moral agency of His quickened children in all ages into His plan. Furthermore because Christ bought all mankind then I don't have to lie to anyone for whom Christ did not die when I tell tem they can be saved. Whereas if I tell someone for whom Christ did not die that they "can" then I've lied so I'd have to be very careful how I phrase my evangelistic message. With my view I don't run that risk.Marty Summershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14925347433421691898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-3447930440633827572012-06-14T22:49:32.964-07:002012-06-14T22:49:32.964-07:00I really had a good question and a comment to boot...I really had a good question and a comment to boot.<br /><br />Bobby Grow just totally made my head implode; does anyone know what he was trying to get at? In English or Greek will even be ok.<br /><br />Great post nicely explained and totally understandableThomas Louwhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08406486510590654502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-45237852404845966542012-06-14T20:42:59.920-07:002012-06-14T20:42:59.920-07:00Pastor Dan, I cannot wait to see your next post! I...Pastor Dan, I cannot wait to see your next post! I have been a committed five-pointer ever since my conversion (thanks to Spurgeon) but one of the most logical defenses of the 'L' comes from here:<br /><br />http://gentlereformation.org/2011/01/05/why-the-fifth-point-matters/<br /><br />The gist of the article has already been touched on by a few others here in the combox - that if God the Father elects only and precisely those to be saved, and the Spirit converts only and precisely those that are saved, would Jesus then in accomplishing His salvific work (Who BTW only does the will of the Father) have a different scope of people than the other Two in the Trinity? I think not.<br /><br />God bless you for your work Pastor Dan. I eagerly await your more substantial thoughts on this subject. May your faithfulness and fruitfulness greatly increase for His matchless Name's sake!Chris Deanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03467248411829837951noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-9742981959081816642012-06-14T19:32:24.769-07:002012-06-14T19:32:24.769-07:00"Les, aren't you grateful that Matt. 1:21..."Les, aren't you grateful that Matt. 1:21 says "He Himself shall save His people from their sins," and not "He Himself shall try to save His people from their sins" or "He Himself shall give His people the opportunity to save themselves from their sins, if they want to badly enough"?<br /><br />The money post so early in the thread! I cannot picture Jesus sitting at the right hand of His Father asking Him why He didn't do enough. Wringing His hands while at the same time knowing that at the End of Days there will be those blaspheming God. He died for all sinners and all their sins. Some couldn't care less.<br /><br />Therein lies their problem, not His.Sonjahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12400678595605810974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21616815637647158902012-06-14T18:56:49.246-07:002012-06-14T18:56:49.246-07:00Danny boy, we must work to get you to a perfect 5....Danny boy, we must work to get you to a perfect 5.00! It is commonly said that there are no verses to directly support Limited Atonement, yet I think there is. John 10:11 certainly is a good one. Also if you exegete 2 Cor. 5-:19 correctly you will see that is can only be a particular redemption there, as Sinclair Ferguson shows in one of his sermons. Also Steve Lawson's series call 10 Reasons Why I Believe in Definite Atonement will shows tons of supportive verses, as does his Foundations of Grace book.<br /><br />A 4 pointer is an Amryaldian, no? I find most 4 pointers just don't like the idea of the L because it goes against what they have been taught. They havent really worked out a good argument for there case and do not like to use the name of Amyraut (most 4 pointers have not heard of him either. But how can the Father elect from eternity past a specific group of people, and the Spirit will regenerate, seal and sanctify that group, but the Son goes rebel and propitiates for all?mikebhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06947509425403456046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-52488647253618091972012-06-14T18:06:45.077-07:002012-06-14T18:06:45.077-07:00I see no problem in Jesus dying especially for the...I see no problem in Jesus dying especially for the church but also making some people who will never believe "saveable"--Heb 6:4-6 talks about reprobates whose hearts were once enlightened.<br /><br />Plus, as Marty pointed out, a strictly limited atonement obscures the typology in Ruth.<br /><br />Mt 13:44: “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and hid; and for joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field." Verse 38 establishes that the field is the world. Who besides Christ can purchase the world? This parable implies that Christ buys the whole world to obtain His church.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11254920985242767984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-16542652585994726872012-06-14T17:47:12.601-07:002012-06-14T17:47:12.601-07:00I consider myself a 5-pointer so don't jump to...I consider myself a 5-pointer so don't jump to the wrong conclusion by my post. I am a computer engineer who tends to theologize in computereze..please don't hold that against me. I view Divine Soteriology as consisting of a requirement spec (which is not limited in any way) and a design spec (which is specific and therefore limited). Theologically that would be sufficiency vs efficiency. I use Boaz in Ruth 4:9-10 to explain how God (Boaz) "bought" all humanity on the corss (the whole field -- all that was Elimelech's as well as Chilion's and Mahlon's -- unlimited sufficiency) for the specific purpose of "purchasing" a specific bride (Ruth not Orpah or Naomi -- limited efficiency). In this context look at 2Pe 2:1 and Eph 1:14. Note also the language of James 2:9-11 where we find breaking just one law renders one a transgressor guilty of breaking the whole law. Thus, to be consistent, if Christ died for "sin" then His death should cover all "sins." I know this sounds like Potential Atonement but I deny that on the grounds that a triune God is involved in the Redemption of mankind. Had the Father not elected a bride and given her to the Son then Christ would never have hung on the cross to atone for her sin and had Christ not atoned for her sin then, of course, the Holy Spirit would not go to her and efficaciously draw her to Christ. I'm trying to keep this short so I'll end here unless someone wants to pursue the line of reasoning further.Marty Summershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14925347433421691898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-30060724270153773262012-06-14T17:40:17.988-07:002012-06-14T17:40:17.988-07:00Linking you up to my blog with one of your points ...Linking you up to my blog with one of your points in a quote. Very informative article. And lengthy. Many great and illuminating thoughts!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-80036033127494499672012-06-14T17:15:36.818-07:002012-06-14T17:15:36.818-07:00Matthew 7:21 Not everyone who says to Me, "Lo...Matthew 7:21 Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord,Lord",will enter the kingdom of heaven...<br />Matthew 13:36-43 ...the tares are the sons of the evil one...and will throw them into the furnace of fire...<br />Luke 16:23 "In Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment...<br /><br />Jesus clearly stated that not all are to be saved. L is pretty much confirmed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-50371688552767133912012-06-14T15:36:09.940-07:002012-06-14T15:36:09.940-07:00A wild Shai Linne appears to weigh in. ...annnnd ...A wild Shai Linne appears to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPJ_SnhjZg0" rel="nofollow">weigh in</a>. ...annnnd DISAPPEARS.Zachary Bartelshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13188521505536660574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-7433784666689399952012-06-14T15:03:05.714-07:002012-06-14T15:03:05.714-07:00Did you even read the post. He addresses that in ...Did you even read the post. He addresses that in next paragraph.<br /><br />I look forward to the next part. This was a well written summary and argument for particular redemption.Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15285043747501470199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-22387865835713822752012-06-14T14:40:21.133-07:002012-06-14T14:40:21.133-07:00OK Let me ask you this:
If you say to an unbelieve...OK Let me ask you this:<br />If you say to an unbeliever "Jesus died for sinners just like you and me", do you expect them to understand that you didn't mean "Jesus died for you"? Doesn't that sound a wee bit disingenuous?<br /><br />Best wishes<br /><br />DavidDavidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11280438047874748436noreply@blogger.com