Why is the Word of God not so Sharp on Forums?

[John Bauer]

EVERYONE disagrees with me on PSA.
So I just keep inviting them to show me where the Bible teaches about “transferred wrath” (the concept that I couldn’t find).

I'm your huckleberry. But in a thread separate from this one.

 

[David1701]

In a way, this isn't derailing the Thread; because it's what prompted the OP. - P1, Jesus said Loving God and your Neighbor fulfills the Law. P2, Jesus Kept the Law. C, Jesus Loved his Neighbor. ~ My thoughts go back to the Edenic Covenant; is it it's own Covenant of Works, or was it part of the Mosaic Covenant of Works?

The Mosaic law was given for very different reasons from the one prohibition in the Garden of Eden.

It's a Presbyterian/Baptist difference; but Christ Kept Adam's Covenant with God too; and that affects everybody's neighborhood...


Who's his Neighbor? As the Second Adam, the World is his Neighbor. As the Elect One, the Unconditionally Elect are his Neighbor. As the Second Adam, he purchased even false prophets; and is their Sovereign. As the Second Adam, he Sacrificed himself for the World; but as the Christ, he only Bore the Sins of the Many...

Umm...this is somewhat confused.

One's "neighbour" is a person in need; and that was not about Jesus' neighbour, but about ours.

The passage about purchasing false prophets (actually it's about purchasing false teachers; the false prophets are used as a comparison) is about God the Father, not Christ.

2 Pet. 2:1 (W.P.N.T.) However, there were also false prophets among the people, just as, indeed, there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Owner who bought them (bringing on themselves swift destruction).

The word translated "Owner" here is not the word for "Lord" (kurios) when applied to Jesus; rather, it is a word signifying an absolute ruler (despotes) and is used elsewhere to refer to God the Father, when applied to a divine Person.

The Owner having bought them, also does not refer to the blood of Christ, but to the idea found in Deut. 32:6.

Deut. 32:6 (V.W.) Do you deal thus with Jehovah, O foolish and unwise people? Is He not your Father, who bought you? Has He not made you and established you?

The Father "bought" them, by making them, providing for them, and establishing them (Israel).

Your attempted distinction between Jesus as last Adam and as Christ is thoroughly unbiblical! He did not die on the cross for different sets of people, in different ways! He came to save his people from their sins; and that is exactly what he did.

 

[David1701]

It supports hyper Calvinism because it says "us". Limited atonement it is.

God bless you and yours!

Hyper-Calvinism is variously defined, but its main characteristic is that its adherents do not believe in the need for evangelism.

Limited Atonement is part of what is commonly called "Calvinism" and is not specific to Hyper-Calvinism.

 

[ReverendRV]

@Hazelelponi is planning a Thread on this...

I know that because of my differences, I would be the Belle of the Ball at the Thread; everyone would wanna dance with me. But as the OP, she can be the Belle...

 

[makesends]

Hazelelponi said:
They feel helpless and powerless and allowed themselves to be deceived into trusting in themselves instead of in God. (Their words, their faith as opposed to God's words and a trust in His work).

Exactly. And no matter how many times you point out that they are trusting in themselves (free will and Word of Faith, as Word of Faith is always also free will) and not God, they will deny it. And they truly, probably, believe their own denial. They have self protective blinders on, and cannot see it. That Word of Life movement actually has its roots in Christian Science and the other metaphysical religions of the day. My sister hates CS, and rightly so. But to her if you attach Jesus' name to anything, no matter how similar it is to the original error, it is validated. With CS it was about healing and death that could be overcome by changing ones thinking and their words. With WOL it is also wealth. But it is witchcraft all the same. Attempting to manipulate circumstances and God through methods

Yep. The "freewill" flavor they apply to the Gospel comes to mind, here. I try to remind myself that I don't have it right either, though I much prefer the Reformed/Calvinist flavor, both emotionally and intellectually. What I keep seeing is that these whose eternity (according to their 'gospel') hinges on their decision, still, maybe in the recesses of their mind, can't help but doubt themselves and the integrity of their decision— hence, they, too, like us, still depend on God's decision and mercy, even if they don't realize that they do.

All the noise we throw at this subject is useless compared to God's work. But, ha!, noise we must! Can't help it. (And no, I'm not on my pain meds today, so far, yet. It's just loopy me.)

 

[Hazelelponi]

@Hazelelponi is planning a Thread on this...

I know that because of my differences, I would be the Belle of the Ball at the Thread; everyone would wanna dance with me. But as the OP, she can be the Belle...

Lol... Meany. You know I hate that, I really do... But you're correct in that I'm writing enough I'll be the one having to answer anyway.

I'm home, I'll get the new thread up and give you a tag when it posts.

H

Thread 'Who is Jesus Neighbor?'

Apr 13, 2025

It is the intention of this OP to seek to provide an answer to this quote taken from another thread:

In a way, this isn't derailing the Thread; because it'Is what prompted the OP. - P1, Jesus said Loving God and your Neighbor fulfills the Law. P2, Jesus Kept the Law. C, Jesus Loved his Neighbor. ~ My thoughts go back to the Edenic Covenant; is it it's own Covenant of Works, or was it part of the Mosaic Covenant of Works? It's a Presbyterian/Baptist difference; but Christ Kept Adam's Covenant with God too; and that affects everybody's neighborhood...

Who's his Neighbor? As the Second...

• Hazelelponi
• Replies: 6
• Forum: Bible Questions and Study

• 

^^^ thread .. @ReverendRV

 

[Carbon]

I get it; the things of God are Spiritually understood. But that's not what I mean. We're Christians, right?

Who is? Everyone on the forum? It's possible.

When we use Scripture and Sound Doctrine on each other, why doesn't it work like it's supposed too?

Just what is it supposed to do?

 

[Carbon]

How is scripture and sound doctrine supposed to work among Christians......

Yes, I'm curious now also.

and what makes you think all the forum's members are Christians?

Though I would like to think so, it's quite possible not everyone is, just like in a church.

 

[Carbon]

We don't know what that word is doing.

Ain't that the truth. Amen!

 

[ReverendRV]

Who is? Everyone on the forum? It's possible.

Just what is it supposed to do?

It's supposed to keep Private Interpretations at bay...

 

[Carbon]

Another thing we have in common! No cup or two for me. The whole dang pot!

I hear ya.

 

[Carbon]

We also have to remember that God's word always accomplishes what he sends it out to achieve (Is. 55), which might not be what we want it to achieve.

Amen!

 

[Carbon]

Acts 2:16+20

Nice verses. Not to change the subject, and I won't, so I will just mention there is proof for PSA from Genesis to Revelation. Quite easy to prove.

 

[Carbon]

God is angry with sin.

Jesus was made sin for us.

God imputed his righteous anger against sin onto Jesus, as our Substitute.

Amen brother!

 

[makesends]

EVERYONE disagrees with me on PSA.
So I just keep inviting them to show me where the Bible teaches about “transferred wrath” (the concept that I couldn’t find).

Does the truth of PSA (if there is truth to it) always and everywhere depend on "transferred wrath"?

This reminds me of other threads we've had here lately, such as, 'double-predestination'. So much depends on what is meant, that I can't say that "transferred wrath" is endemic to the meaning of PSA.

I say I believe in PSA because to me there is plenty in scripture to show that Christ atoned for my sin, in my place. Simple as that. Penal? —you bet! The wages of sin is death, and he died in my place. Penal.

 

[Carbon]

I say I believe in PSA because to me there is plenty in scripture to show that Christ atoned for my sin, in my place. Simple as that. Penal? —you bet! The wages of sin is death, and he died in my place. Penal.

Amen brother!
To think of the Triune God in the Covenant of Redemption, planning and agreeing, choosing a bride for Christ, and Jesus choosing to condescend himself and come to earth as a human. This condescension alone is more than we humans can comprehend. As you say, brother, and I wholly agree, PSA is throughout God's word. And it is disturbing to see how so many could believe what Jesus did, coming to earth as a man, which alone should stop us in our tracks, but they refuse to agree with scripture about Jesus drinking the cup of wrath.


I mean, for now, look at this. No longer was a high priest needed to atone for sin; Jesus, the Lamb of God, has done it once and for all. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; Matt 27:51. We know that the rent veil means we have a mediating high Priest. We know his body was torn violently.
(1 Tim 2:5).

When we read through all of scripture, we see it's about Jesus, the Son of God. And there is nothing gentle about his sacrifice, it's plain to see he suffered the Father's wrath.
19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,

20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; Heb 10:19-20.

 

[makesends]

Hyper-Calvinism is variously defined, but its main characteristic is that its adherents do not believe in the need for evangelism.

Limited Atonement is part of what is commonly called "Calvinism" and is not specific to Hyper-Calvinism.

I'm called a hyper-calvinist, and I don't believe even the hypers go far enough on some things, but if that is their main characteristic, I'm not one of them. I have heard that characteristic applied to Calvinists in general, but always by someone trying to defeat Calvinism.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Hyper-Calvinism is variously defined, but its main characteristic is that its adherents do not believe in the need for evangelism.

Limited Atonement is part of what is commonly called "Calvinism" and is not specific to Hyper-Calvinism.

My husband is hyper Calvinist...

He had no issues evangelizing me .. in fact, he was highly instrumental in my coming to Christ. God is the only one who trumped what my husband did. .

My husband doesn't believe in funding missions through the church local - that's different than not believing we should evangelize, and different than not believing in funding missions as individuals.

I think most people misunderstand what is being communicated by what is said. My husband threw me the first time he said no missions until it was explained..

 

[David1701]

My husband is hyper Calvinist...

He had no issues evangelizing me .. in fact, he was highly instrumental in my coming to Christ. God is the only one who trumped what my husband did. .

My husband doesn't believe in funding missions through the church local - that's different than not believing we should evangelize, and different than not believing in funding missions as individuals.

I think most people misunderstand what is being communicated by what is said. My husband threw me the first time he said no missions until it was explained..

Then what is "hyper-Calvinist" about him?

 

[civic]

EVERYONE disagrees with me on PSA.
So I just keep inviting them to show me where the Bible teaches about “transferred wrath” (the concept that I couldn’t find).

Not everyone, I'm a someone.