BJ Bear
Well-known member
Hi!
My guess is that if we break out the bright light and the rubber hose to examine their positive statements in this regard we will find and ageee that it is an attempt on their part to make the law salvific rather than the Gospel of Christ.
In other words, they are using their natural knowledge of God, the law, to reach their conclusion rather than the specific Christian revelation.
“But now the righteousness [justification] of God without [apart from] the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;” (Rom 3:21, KJV)
They may agree, but using their definitions are they right according to the immediate context of Scripture?
Yes, the question is whether the claim is Scripturally verifiable.There is another perspective; what if they are both right?
How can that be a true statement unless there are unstated assumptions? For example, an unstated assumption that, "Grace comes first, and that it effectively trespasses [some] Sinners uninvited." Otherwise, in this instance what happens to double predestination and the acronym?I am known on the Armimian and Calvinism Boards as a Middle Man. Both Arminianism and Calvinism believe Grace comes first, and that it effectively trespasses Sinners uninvited.
How do both groups logically and truthfully conclude that something limits the atonement? I ask logically and truthfully because Scripture plainly states the contrary.Both believe we are Chosen, something limits the Atonement; and we have to Persevere.
My guess is that if we break out the bright light and the rubber hose to examine their positive statements in this regard we will find and ageee that it is an attempt on their part to make the law salvific rather than the Gospel of Christ.
In other words, they are using their natural knowledge of God, the law, to reach their conclusion rather than the specific Christian revelation.
“But now the righteousness [justification] of God without [apart from] the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;” (Rom 3:21, KJV)
Now there's an elephant that would have to be eaten one bite at a time.Both believe we're Justified through Faith, apart from Works, God is Sovereign; and so on...
They may agree, but using their definitions are they right according to the immediate context of Scripture?
I like the analogy but it breaks when one affirms that there are no left overs when it comes to the objective true gospel of Jesus Christ to and for all menIt's like making Chili; it doesn't matter if you put the meat or the beans in first, if all the ingredients are the same. It comes together, the next day the pots taste the same...