By Nature Children of Wrath as others !

[brightfame52]

If no application of what Christ accomplished was needed, what do you think the Spirit was doing in John 3?

John 3 has nothing to do with the elect not being ever under wrath based on the death of Christ releasing them from sin b4 Gods law and Justice

 

[Arial]

John 3 has nothing to do with the elect not being ever under wrath based on the death of Christ releasing them from sin b4 Gods law and Justice

So---you don't know the answer?

 

[brightfame52]

If the elect of God, who by nature are the children of wrath as others[the non elect] if they at anytime be under Gods wrath because of their sins and being children of wrath by nature, then it serves to reason that Gods wrath wasn't turned away by the atoning blood of His Dear Son, that His blood failed to satisfy His offended Justice for them, that His Blood failed to propitiate Him, to appease or turn away His Wrath on them. If that Blood didn't do it, then what does ? Is it the sinners act of believing that ultimately appeased Gods Wrath over and above the Blood of Christ ?

 

[makesends]

Like when it says this Jn 3:36

36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

I don't see where it says, "He that believeth not yet, the wrath of God abideth not on him."

 

[makesends]

If the elect of God, who by nature are the children of wrath as others[the non elect] if they at anytime be under Gods wrath because of their sins and being children of wrath by nature, then it serves to reason that Gods wrath wasn't turned away by the atoning blood of His Dear Son, that His blood failed to satisfy His offended Justice for them, that His Blood failed to propitiate Him, to appease or turn away His Wrath on them. If that Blood didn't do it, then what does ? Is it the sinners act of believing that ultimately appeased Gods Wrath over and above the Blood of Christ ?

Where is the 'huh?—blink, blink, blink' emoji?

How does that reasoning even begin to follow? And where does those elect, not yet regenerated, who, "like the rest, by nature [are] children of wrath", imply that his blood does not do it? Are you denying that portion of scripture? Does scripture contradict itself?

 

[Josheb]

This discussion isn't about the work of the Holy spirit it's about the work of Christ.

False dichotomy. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ.

Romans 8:9
However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.



.

 

[Eleanor]

Absolutely false, those Christ for are saved from the penalty of their sins before they are born.

To be in agreement with all the NT, they are born condemned objects of wrath by nature (Eph 2:3),
and not freed from that penalty of condemnation until they are born again (Jn 3:3-5, 18)
by the sovereign regeneration of the Holy Spirit, as unaccountable as the wind (Jn 3:6-8).

 

[Arial]

If the elect of God, who by nature are the children of wrath as others[the non elect] if they at anytime be under Gods wrath because of their sins and being children of wrath by nature, then it serves to reason that Gods wrath wasn't turned away by the atoning blood of His Dear Son, that His blood failed to satisfy His offended Justice for them, that His Blood failed to propitiate Him, to appease or turn away His Wrath on them. If that Blood didn't do it, then what does ? Is it the sinners act of believing that ultimately appeased Gods Wrath over and above the Blood of Christ ?

No one is denying that is what Christ's blood did. That is not the issue here or the disagreement. The disagreement is that you say that the elect were never under his wrath because of the work of Christ. And that is true. But that is not because they were never sinners in need of salvation through a union with Christ. What you mean by "wrath" needs to be clarified.

If by that you mean his wrath of eternal judgment that a person is destined for if they die an unbeliever or unbelieving when he returns, then your statement is correct.

If by the wrath of God you mean that they were never sinners in need of the work of Christ being applied to them (by the Holy Spirit, John 3)and through faith, then you are wrong.

The elect were never destined to face the wrath of God---that is true. They were predestined to be placed in Christ and God is ever faithful to do just that. It is union with Christ that saves. And that happens, in time, through regeneration (from what? From what they were before they were regenerated, a sinner dead in trespasses and sins). And with regeneration comes faith to believe. All by grace.

 

[Arial]

To be in agreement with all the NT, they are born condemned objects of wrath by nature (Eph 2:3),
and not freed from that penalty of condemnation until they are born again (Jn 3:3-5, 18)
by the sovereign regeneration of the Holy Spirit, as unaccountable as the wind (Jn 3:6-8).

Exactly, They were objects of wrath---like Paul says in Eph 2---like all the rest., And Paul is writing to believers, the elect. But they were not destined to receive his wrath, they were predestined not to receive his wrath. They were predestined to be placed in Christ by the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, and through faith.

 

[Eleanor]

False, except the elect have the same wrath wortthy nature, they are not under wrath. What for ? Their sins have been paid for by Christ

Who is Paul exempting when he tells the Christian Ephesians:

"Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath." (Eph 2:3)

 

[brightfame52]

I don't see where it says, "He that believeth not yet, the wrath of God abideth not on him."

Do you see where it says the wrath of God abides on an individual?

 

[brightfame52]

Where is the 'huh?—blink, blink, blink' emoji?

How does that reasoning even begin to follow? And where does those elect, not yet regenerated, who, "like the rest, by nature [are] children of wrath", imply that his blood does not do it? Are you denying that portion of scripture? Does scripture contradict itself?

You lost me

 

[brightfame52]

False dichotomy. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ.

Romans 8:9
However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.



.

This is about the work of Christ, the Work of the Spirit wasn't to die for the sins of the elect

 

[brightfame52]

To be in agreement with all the NT, they are born condemned objects of wrath by nature (Eph 2:3),

False that is never stated there. Nothing about being born condemned and objects of God's Wrath. The very next verse says they were objects of God's Great love and Mercy. You should not add to scripture what is not there

 

[brightfame52]

No one is denying that is what Christ's blood did. That is not the issue here or the disagreement

Yes it is the issue. The blood of Christ propitiated God for the sins of the elect or not.

 

[brightfame52]

Who is Paul exempting when he tells the Christian Ephesians:

"Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath." (Eph 2:3)

Never said they were objects of Wrath.

 

[Josheb]

The elect are never under wrath, wrath is due to sin, the penalty of sin. But Christ satisfied that penalty by His Death for them. They never experience God's wrath for sin. They're vessels of mercy

This post, and a few others, contradicts other posts you've posted. You have gone on record stating "ALL mankind" is born unrighteous. You have also gone on record stating wrath is due to sin. The word "all," means all. Scripture states all unrighteousness is sin (1 Jn. 5:17). Scripture states the wage for sin is death and everyone who sins is dead in sin. Scripture also states the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people. The reason Christ paid the penalty for sin is so that those chosen and called by God to believe in him would not have to pay a penalty they could not pay and God would not have to be wrathful on everyone. People who don't sin do not need Jesus to pay the penalty for sin.

You are correct: they do not experience God's wrath for sin and the reason they do not experience God's wrath for sin in the future is because Christ paid the penalty. That is not because God created two different types of people. It is because God changed some of the sinners after they sinned became sinful, became dead in sin without hope apart from Christ, became objects of wrath. This is why Paul did , in fact, self-identify with sinners as a former object of wrath and made it clear to his readers that they too had been the same. They, therefore, had reason to praise God and be thankful. God made good people. People became sinful. God saved some from sin and wrath and in doing so those He saved were changed. It was from the population of the damned that those to be saved were chosen.


And this is very, very important because what this op preaches is a different gospel.


I have endeavored to walk with you through some of the most basic and most explicit statements in scripture and you've refused.

Isaiah 1:18
Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.


Genesis 1:31 explicitly states all that God made was good. God did not make sin. Sin entered the world through the disobedience of one man (Romans 5) and as a consequence of sin's entrance into the world death has come to all mankind. God did not make one group of people who were good by His making and another group of people who are bad by His making. All were made good. All became sinful, dead, and thereby objects of wrath. God saved some from His wrath and that is what makes the no longer objects of wrath.

When you speak of Jesus as our propitiation for sin you are implicitly acknowledging Jesus himself was once an object of God's wrath! God made him who knew no sin to be sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God (2 Cor. 5:21). God was pleased to crush His Son and put him to grief (Isa. 53:10. Good people have no need for any propitiation. Scripture is bluntly clear when it states no one is good but God (Mk. 10:18). All that God made was good, but by the time God observed humanity in Noah's day every thought of every human was only evil all the time (Gen. 6:5). This continued to be the case for all humanity and the psalmist declared "All have turned away, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one." No one is good but God. God made humanity good. ALL humanity became bad. God saved some, and those He saved he..... created anew.

John 3:3
Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, except anyone be born anew from above, he is not able to see the kingdom of God."

Ephesians 2:4-10
4But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

2 Corinthians 5:17 KJV
Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.


Those God saves become new creations.

 

[Eleanor]

False that is never stated there. Nothing about being born condemned and objects of God's Wrath. The very next verse says they were objects of God's Great love and Mercy. You should not add to scripture what is not there

I'm thinkin' you need to read Scripture to see what is stated there in Eph 2:3 regarding what the elect were before they came to faith.

 

[Eleanor]

Never said they were objects of Wrath.

It's not about what you say, it's about what Paul says. . .i.e., the elect ("we") were objects of wrath until they were born again through faith in Jesus Christ (Eph 2:3).

 

[Arial]

Yes it is the issue. The blood of Christ propitiated God for the sins of the elect or not.

If you would pay attention to what others are saying, and actually engage with it, instead of assuming that whatever they say will be wrong, and repeat yourself, things might go better.

The blood of Christ did propitiate (make satisfaction) and it did so when it was shed. That was something Christ did with God. It was between the Father and Christ. That blood, that propitiation, must be applied to the believer. If they were not objects of wrath, there would be no need of that and no need of regeneration, and no need of faith. Take a moment to think that through. Please.