Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

PaulThomson

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2023
3,474
455
83
All fair points, but that doesn't comport to the context of the passage. But I have enjoyed the discussion. Much grace.
One final thought: when someone does believe, is their unbelief forgiven?
IMO Yes. Present unbelief toward Christ disqualifies from being presently in Christ. But present belief puts one in Christ; and in Him past unbelief is not remembered IMO.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
19,184
6,604
113
62
IMO Yes. Present unbelief toward Christ disqualifies from being presently in Christ. But present belief puts one in Christ; and in Him past unbelief is not remembered IMO.
So, in this admission, aren't you admitting that unbelief can be forgiven, and, therefore, not the unpardonable sin?
 

Rufus

Well-known member
Feb 17, 2024
2,429
263
83
Here's some truth I learned about you:

1. You will address someone.
2. You will misconstrue their words.
3. You will denigrate them.
4. You will ascribe their supposed lack of understanding to having poor teachers.
5. You will lament to another about that someone.

Guess which number you are on?
And that's just his short list, right? :D
 

Rufus

Well-known member
Feb 17, 2024
2,429
263
83
I agree that the work of the Spirit must be first. As a well known writer once stated:
Please remember that the first Adam was created as very good. He had a very close relationship with his maker and was provided something that we no longer posses, (both the ability and liberty to choose either good or evil).

The Bible clearly and consistently teaches (1) man is free to do good or evil, that he is at liberty to do either, but (2) that he is able to do only evil because of his fallen condition. The will cannot escape the moral character out of which it comes. If the soul is entirely corrupt so that its knowledge and desire are defective and rotten, it follows that it will ever will to do that which is evil.

The ability to do good was lost with the fall of Adam. Now “every imagination of the thoughts of his heart are only evil” (Gen 6:5). He is able to do good only as he is regenerated in order that he may again possess the good heart and will and to do God’s good pleasure (Eph 2:1, John 3:3, Phil 2:13).

Yet his ability is not identical with that which Adam originally had. The regenerate man is not yet able to do God's will perfectly. He does truly delight in the will of God. He does persist in the way of righteousness. Sin cannot prevail in him as it formally did. But sin is present with him (Rom 7:21). The reason for this is that we are in the process of being made holy.
Amen, brother! Good post.

And I have always maintained that the will of moral agents is a paradox. Man is totally free to choose according to the limitations of his nature. But he cannot choose to BE something that he is not! A sinner simply cannot "freely" chose to become righteous, anymore than God can chose to be unrighteous. Righteousness isn't in a sinner's DNA. At the same time, man's will is in bondage to his nature.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,993
8,367
113
I agree that the work of the Spirit must be first. As a well known writer once stated:
Please remember that the first Adam was created as very good. He had a very close relationship with his maker and was provided something that we no longer posses, (both the ability and liberty to choose either good or evil).
The work of the Spirit is ALWAYS FIRST. Both in creation and redemption.

So weed that idea out of your position. And then you can eliminate this nonsense:
"something that we no longer posses, (both the ability and liberty to choose either good or evil)"

The Bible itself is Spirit, by which men MUST either CHOOSE to believe on their Savior or refuse.
First the "choosing", then comes......the "separating" / "dividing".

Deu 30:19
I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

Deu 29:21
And the LORD shall separate him unto evil out of all the tribes of Israel, according to all the curses of the covenant that are written in this book of the law:

Mat 25:32
And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,993
8,367
113
something that we no longer posses, (both the ability and liberty to choose either good or evil).
Absolutely false.

UNFALLEN Adam and Eve had the free will to make bad/wrong decisions.
Decisions that led to their "death" aka separation from God.

FALLEN Adam and Eve had the free will to make good/right decisions.
Decisions that led to "life" aka "salvation" aka "reconciliation" aka "renewed fellowship" with God.

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19because what may be known of God is manifest in THEM, for God has shown it to THEM.
20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, ***so that THEY are without excuse,***
21because, ***although THEY knew God***, THEY did not (CHOOSE TO) glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in THEIR thoughts, and THEIR foolish hearts were darkened.
 

Rufus

Well-known member
Feb 17, 2024
2,429
263
83
Absolutely false.

UNFALLEN Adam and Eve had the free will to make bad/wrong decisions.
Decisions that led to their "death" aka separation from God.

FALLEN Adam and Eve had the free will to make good/right decisions.
Decisions that led to "life" aka "salvation" aka "reconciliation" aka "renewed fellowship" with God.

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19because what may be known of God is manifest in THEM, for God has shown it to THEM.
20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, ***so that THEY are without excuse,***
21because, ***although THEY knew God***, THEY did not (CHOOSE TO) glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in THEIR thoughts, and THEIR foolish hearts were darkened.
And what part of vv. 18 & 21 don't you get? They did not choose because they had no heart for God. This is why they WILLFULLY suppressed the truth in unrighteousness. Why can't you understand that the natural man hates God!?
 

PaulThomson

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2023
3,474
455
83
So, in this admission, aren't you admitting that unbelief can be forgiven, and, therefore, not the unpardonable sin?
It's unpardonable while doing it. Other sins, on account of the atonement, are pardonable while doing them, but the unbelief that accompanies other sins is not forgiven while practising the unbelief.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
19,184
6,604
113
62
It's unpardonable while doing it. Other sins, on account of the atonement, are pardonable while doing them, but the unbelief that accompanies other sins is not forgiven while practising the unbelief.
Then why doesn't He say while doing them? This makes very little sense to me as you have to assume your understanding into the passage.
But again, have enjoyed the discussion.
 

PaulThomson

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2023
3,474
455
83
Then why doesn't He say while doing them? This makes very little sense to me as you have to assume your understanding into the passage.
But again, have enjoyed the discussion.
Mark 3:29 ὃς δ᾽ ἂν (But whoever) βλασφημήσῃ (might be blaspheming; present subjunctive) εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ( to the Holy Spirit) οὐκ ἔχει (is not having; present indicative) ἄφεσιν (forgiveness) εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα (into the age) ἀλλ᾽ (but rather) ἔνοχός ἐστιν (is being liable; present indicative) αἰωνίου κρίσεως (of aeonous judgement).

The primary sense of the Greek present and future tenses is to indicate a continuous action in the present or future. When the present continuous makes sense, that is the default primary sense. If the continuous sense does not make sense, the simple present may be inferred.
So, the Greek indicates that while a person is blaspheming (present continuous) the Holy Spirit, they are not having (continuous present) aeonous life; and if they continue to do so they are continuously in danger of judgement in the age/aeon to come. IMHO the other texts I have cited indicate that the sin of not believing in Jesus when the Holy Spirit bears witness to Him through words and deeds, is what Jesus means by blaspheming the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth sent to convince the world of a sin: that (hoti) they believe not on Him.
 

PaulThomson

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2023
3,474
455
83
Then why doesn't He say while doing them? This makes very little sense to me as you have to assume your understanding into the passage.
But again, have enjoyed the discussion.
Even those who believe in limited atonement believe that the elect are already forgiven for their sins through the atonement even while doing them. So, I don't see why it should seem odd that those believing in universal atonement should believe the same about all sins of all people, except the unforgivable sin: unforgivable being understood as unforgivable in the present for as long as it is being committed in the present.
 

PaulThomson

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2023
3,474
455
83
Then why doesn't He say while doing them? This makes very little sense to me as you have to assume your understanding into the passage.
But again, have enjoyed the discussion.
Luke 12:10 καὶ πᾶς (And everyone) ὃς (who) ἐρεῖ (will speak, future indicative) λόγον (a word) εἰς τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (at the Son of Man) ἀφεθήσεται (it will be forgiven, future indicative passive) αὐτῷ (to him)· τῷ δὲ εἰς (but to the one) τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα (the Holy Spirit) βλασφημήσαντι (having blasphemed, aorist active participle) οὐκ ἀφεθήσεται (it will not be forgiven, future indicative passive).

Greek verbs in their aorist indicative aspect present what might be considered as a momentary snapshot of an action at a particular instant in time. The action was happening when the snapshot was taken, but we cannot tell whether the action happened or was happening at other times outside of the instant the snapshot was taken.

So, the question is, "When, in relation to the time that the blasphemer will not be being forgiven, was the instant that Jesus had in mind when the blasphemer had spoken against the Holy Spirit, such that s/he will not be forgiven? Could it be a snapshot of their behaviour at times immediately before their not being forgiven. The person speaks against the Holy Spirit and the immediate consequence is that they are not being forgiven for doing so. This state of guilt maintains until the person repents and believes in the Holy Spirit's testimony to Jesus. Then this warning no longer applies, since the person has not just blasphemed the Holy Spirit, but has validated Him. So, the Greek tenses here allow for unforgiveness being the immediate consequence for blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, but that consequence being undone by some future agreement with the Holy Spirit concerning Jesus.

I also note that this parallel passage in Luke does not have any contextual connection to people attributing the works of the Holy Spirit to Satan. The context here is about confessing and denying Jesus.

8Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God:
9But he that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God.
10¶And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
19,184
6,604
113
62
Luke 12:10 καὶ πᾶς (And everyone) ὃς (who) ἐρεῖ (will speak, future indicative) λόγον (a word) εἰς τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (at the Son of Man) ἀφεθήσεται (it will be forgiven, future indicative passive) αὐτῷ (to him)· τῷ δὲ εἰς (but to the one) τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα (the Holy Spirit) βλασφημήσαντι (having blasphemed, aorist active participle) οὐκ ἀφεθήσεται (it will not be forgiven, future indicative passive).

Greek verbs in their aorist indicative aspect present what might be considered as a momentary snapshot of an action at a particular instant in time. The action was happening when the snapshot was taken, but we cannot tell whether the action happened or was happening at other times outside of the instant the snapshot was taken.

So, the question is, "When, in relation to the time that the blasphemer will not be being forgiven, was the instant that Jesus had in mind when the blasphemer had spoken against the Holy Spirit, such that s/he will not be forgiven? Could it be a snapshot of their behaviour at times immediately before their not being forgiven. The person speaks against the Holy Spirit and the immediate consequence is that they are not being forgiven for doing so. This state of guilt maintains until the person repents and believes in the Holy Spirit's testimony to Jesus. Then this warning no longer applies, since the person has not just blasphemed the Holy Spirit, but has validated Him. So, the Greek tenses here allow for unforgiveness being the immediate consequence for blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, but that consequence being undone by some future agreement with the Holy Spirit concerning Jesus.

I also note that this parallel passage in Luke does not have any contextual connection to people attributing the works of the Holy Spirit to Satan. The context here is about confessing and denying Jesus.

8Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God:
9But he that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God.
10¶And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.
Like you said, we'll have to agree to disagree.
 

homwardbound

Senior Member
Oct 24, 2012
16,529
489
83
Unbelief of the unregenerate stems from the arrogant rejection of God's drawing of a man.
Which leads to apathy towards those who accepted God's drawing.
Now... that is the unbelief of those who reject salvation.

Unbelief hardens over time and won't know the real you standing there.
They can only see your body, but they see not the soul.

There is also unbeliever of the regenetate type.
They set limits with God and how much God is to manifest in their thinking and actions.
They find their "God limiter" according to what inaccurate doctrine they find an affinity for.

We know unbelief also applies to the believer. We can know by the fact of the verses
you cited to warn the regenerate not to fall into unbelief.

What I was trying to get at was this.
We need to get away from pat answers and to delve into the attitude of an unbeliever possesses.
And.. why one rejects sound doctrine and clings to their pet false doctrines.

It's easy to not define, and simply cite verses that serve a purpose of settling an issue as a command only,
but, without understanding.

Proverbs 4:7​
The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom.
Though it cost all you have, get understanding.


We have been commanded to get understanding to be added to our knowledge of the Word.

Knowledge of the Word is only step One.

Proverbs 1:7​
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge,
but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Some only want knowledge of verses as a means to remain robotically obedient...
They know they should smile and be nice.. And, that's about all.

Where's the life Jesus wants us to have?
That only comes from when gaining understanding.
Not simply repeating verses that have yet to be analyzed by someone with the gift and be understood.

John 10:10​
The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy;
I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.
Satan must let Christians cite Bible verses. He can't avoid it.
Its understanding that he fights them from gaining.


You can have a million Bible verses memorized, yet have no understanding.
And, think you are a great Christian (in a humble sort of way, of course).


So be it... Grace and peace.
okay, thank you for your interpreting health of others how each thinks and feels and believes or not believes. It sounds like you have gone through troubles and seen much harm from others too, there is an angst in your writings, I feel that and might be wrong.
God simply desires for all to trust God and know Jeremiah 29:11 is for them too. Other's but in and become billy goats as I have seen that too. love you as God Loves us all first, is for all in reconciliation, the message from the disciples we are reconciled, so be reconciled back to God in thanksgiving and praise too, thank you Father and Son. Then one goes out in love to all as received from God through Son for them
 

stilllearning

Well-known member
Oct 4, 2021
582
298
63
But, at the same time. They were claiming to be of God. And in effect. Were saying Balazebub was stronger than their God.
For they could not cast out demons. That is why Jesus rubbed it in by asking by whom do they cast out demons.

The Pharisee's wrong confession was saying in effect that God is weaker than Balazebub. Both of you seem to be missing that point.

They could not cast out demons!


And when the demon was driven out, the man who had been mute spoke.
The crowd was amazed and said, “Nothing like this has ever been seen in Israel.
Matthew 9:33

That was why Jesus said it was blasphemy against the Holy Spirit! For they who claimed to be God's people doing God's works?
Were claiming that Satan has greater power than their God in regard to casting out demons!

The crowd was amazed and said, “Nothing like this has ever been seen in Israel.”

Can you see the connection now?

And if I drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your people drive them out?
So then, they will be your judges."
Matthew 12:27

They could not drive them out!!!! They became the inferior god in their put down of Jesus!

And when the demon was driven out, the man who had been mute spoke.
The crowd was amazed and said,Nothing like this has ever been seen in Israel.
Matthew 9:33


Here we go...... Got to do some errands.
Not at all. The gospels are really thorough in building out the narrative of the relationship of the Jews and Christ. These men would strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. They were self righteous and they were the ultimate cancel culture. If one of them would have ever said that any god was greater than God. They would have picked up stones and stoned that individual amongst them.

As far as doctrine and understanding what the written word said about God in a intellectual way they were not wrong. We don't find Christ correcting them in that way. In fact Christ said do as they say not as they do. When it came down to keeping the law Christ said they did so on the smallest of details but they had missed the weightier of matters. They would strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.

They were about appearance and self righteousness so they kept the letter of the law but not the spirit of the law. So saying any god was stronger than God was not something they would have done nor does it fit the narrative of the picture, motivation, or attitude of these men.

Them saying he was in league with the devil was a normal response from them about Christ. John 8 breaks it down pretty good to show these elements of who they were and their consistent actions.

Of course the chapter starts with them bringing a woman caught in adultery to Christ to be stoned. So to surmise they would have stoned one of their own for saying another god was greater is something they would have done.

John 8:46-48

46Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
47He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
48Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?

We can see here that them saying he was of the devil was not new as a response from them towards Christ. We also see that they are saying they do not have or worship the same God. They did this by calling him a Samaritan.

We know from the narration of Christ meeting the woman at the well that the Jews did not count the Samaritans as Jews nor did they find they had the same God since the Samaritans were in their eyes not children of Abraham.
This point of Christ not being of them nor serving the same God was also driven home earlier in verse 41

41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.

Then in verses 49-52 we read,
49Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me.
50And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth.
51Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.
52Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil.

So we can see again that calling Christ of the devil was nothing new for them and they did not recognize Christ as serving the same God as them as he was the one actually serving God and it was them who served the devil. Their deception brought on by self righteousness blinded them to that fact.

So when they said that Christ was casting out demons by Beelzebub. It was their norm to link him as in league with the devil. They were not at all saying that Beelzebub was stronger than God as they did not believe they and Christ had the same God or that Christ was even of them.

So why I found that @Cameron143 understood the narrative and you did not. Hence why I agreed with him. I found that your analysis and conclusion was taken from a void of not understanding the narrative and context of the gospels when it comes to how God showed just who these men are. As well as the expected outcome that consistently happened when they interacted with Christ.

Ultimately I find the point was Christ was still merciful because he was full of love. He warned them even though they hated him, that their hate for him could dig them a hole they would not get out of. As their hate could lead them to speak blasphemy that would never be forgiven. He was warning them out of love even though they hated him.
 

PaulThomson

Well-known member
Oct 29, 2023
3,474
455
83
Not at all. The gospels are really thorough in building out the narrative of the relationship of the Jews and Christ. These men would strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. They were self righteous and they were the ultimate cancel culture. If one of them would have ever said that any god was greater than God. They would have picked up stones and stoned that individual amongst them.

As far as doctrine and understanding what the written word said about God in a intellectual way they were not wrong. We don't find Christ correcting them in that way. In fact Christ said do as they say not as they do. When it came down to keeping the law Christ said they did so on the smallest of details but they had missed the weightier of matters. They would strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.

They were about appearance and self righteousness so they kept the letter of the law but not the spirit of the law. So saying any god was stronger than God was not something they would have done nor does it fit the narrative of the picture, motivation, or attitude of these men.

Them saying he was in league with the devil was a normal response from them about Christ. John 8 breaks it down pretty good to show these elements of who they were and their consistent actions.

Of course the chapter starts with them bringing a woman caught in adultery to Christ to be stoned. So to surmise they would have stoned one of their own for saying another god was greater is something they would have done.

John 8:46-48

46Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
47He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
48Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?

We can see here that them saying he was of the devil was not new as a response from them towards Christ. We also see that they are saying they do not have or worship the same God. They did this by calling him a Samaritan.

We know from the narration of Christ meeting the woman at the well that the Jews did not count the Samaritans as Jews nor did they find they had the same God since the Samaritans were in their eyes not children of Abraham.
This point of Christ not being of them nor serving the same God was also driven home earlier in verse 41

41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.

Then in verses 49-52 we read,
49Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me.
50And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth.
51Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.
52Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil.

So we can see again that calling Christ of the devil was nothing new for them and they did not recognize Christ as serving the same God as them as he was the one actually serving God and it was them who served the devil. Their deception brought on by self righteousness blinded them to that fact.

So when they said that Christ was casting out demons by Beelzebub. It was their norm to link him as in league with the devil. They were not at all saying that Beelzebub was stronger than God as they did not believe they and Christ had the same God or that Christ was even of them.

So why I found that @Cameron143 understood the narrative and you did not. Hence why I agreed with him. I found that your analysis and conclusion was taken from a void of not understanding the narrative and context of the gospels when it comes to how God showed just who these men are. As well as the expected outcome that consistently happened when they interacted with Christ.

Ultimately I find the point was Christ was still merciful because he was full of love. He warned them even though they hated him, that their hate for him could dig them a hole they would not get out of. As their hate could lead them to speak blasphemy that would never be forgiven. He was warning them out of love even though they hated him.
So, in other words, they were suffering from a first century version of Trump Derangement Syndrome: Jesus of Nazareth Derangement Syndrome. He threatened their hold on the levers of power they controlled, and they were fixated on eliminating/cancelling Him by whatever means necessary.: they would say anything and do anything, no matter how blatant, absurd and deliberate the lie, to bring Him down. Such committed and deliberate enemies of the truth could never enter in the Kingdom of God and His Christ. Their extreme hatred of Him made it impossible for them to kiss the Son with sincerity and receive Life.

Only, I would disagree with the "a hole they would never get out of" part. I would say, "a hole they could only get out of only by finally embracing the truth", as Saul of Tarsus eventually did.
 

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
2,928
419
83
So, in other words, they were suffering from a first century version of Trump Derangement Syndrome: Jesus of Nazareth Derangement Syndrome. He threatened their hold on the levers of power they controlled, and they were fixated on eliminating/cancelling Him by whatever means necessary.: they would say anything and do anything, no matter how blatant, absurd and deliberate the lie, to bring Him down. Such committed and deliberate enemies of the truth could never enter in the Kingdom of God and His Christ. Their extreme hatred of Him made it impossible for them to kiss the Son with sincerity and receive Life.

Only, I would disagree with the "a hole they would never get out of" part. I would say, "a hole they could only get out of only by finally embracing the truth", as Saul of Tarsus eventually did.
Well done!