Really Mr. Yogi, it's just a simple question. I asked for the purpose of knowing your outlook or sense of the justness and righteousness of God. Do you find Him to be unjust and unrighteous in a case where He only elected by grace, a select few or a remnant of condemned mankind and not all, to save to be His people?
Michael that is your God you have made up My God the one of the bible is a just and righteous God yes and NO he is not like the God you have created in your mind now I have answered this several times so move on if you don't like my answer I am sorry but I have answered.
Yes, now you have given your answer, that is, you find the case of God's election of a few or a remnant of condemned mankind and not all, to save to be His people, as an unjust and unrighteous act. And that is why you don't believe it. That's clear. It's your judgment of what is just and what is righteous that actually is the basis for your belief against that.
Such a question was brought up by Paul regarding God's sovereignty and His election, whether there is unrighteousness in God when He elects people to harden and people to have mercy on, without regard to what they have done. And Paul's answer to that is plain and clear:Romans 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
Some tried to explain this away by the "election to service" and not "election to salvation" argument. But that even does that take away the point of Paul's argument there concerning the acts of God in His sovereignty upon His creatures, even man.
If those scriptures will not shut the mouths of those who does not acknowledge this truth about God, I don't know what will.
Not only Paul testifies to that, but scriptures in general. Would you want me to show you scriptures where the sovereignty of God is shown as described and defined by Paul? Mr. Yogi, I did not create this God in my mind as you said in your excuse on your way out. It's what the scriptures says, the very scriptures you say you believe in. You have to read them Mr. Yogi. And in relation to what I am saying here about God's sovereign acts upon His creatures, especially man, you can consider reading what God had done as testified in Ezekiel 36. AFter reading, perhaps you can tell me what you have seen regarding this subject.
Yes, we know and agree that not all mankind will be saved. And that is exactly my argument. You say that in 1 Tim. 2:6, the "all" there refers to all of mankind, which would make it that Jesus had given Himself a ransom for all men, that is, all of mankind He had redeemed. Now, if you are saying, as you seem to say, that "Salvation is not universal", then the "all" there would not mean what you say it means as to refer to all mankind. And that refutes your position and interpretation of that scriptures, as also then with your position and interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:4. Do you not want to know then what "all" in 1 Tim. 2:6 refers to, and also that in 1 Tim.2:4?
Michael you see here is you default. Jesus nave his life for all but that did not automatically save all, all has to come to faith if not even though Christ died for them they reject that grace and forfeit their salvation. Salvation is conditional one being one must have faith.
You said "Jesus gave his life for all but that did not automatically save all". Yes, it is you who said that, not scriptures. When Jesus died, He said "It is finished". What did He mean by that? One is that of His work of providing redemption completely, and that it presently stood finished. That regarding that, nothing more needed, or ever needs, to be done. The ransom is paid and so the redemption complete. And it redeemed only all those for whom He died for, and obviously not all of mankind. For if it was for all of mankind, then all would be saved as all have been then redeemed.
And you said "all has to come to faith if not even though Christ died for them they reject that grace and forfeit their salvation." I'd like to throw in a few questions that perhaps you or the readers could consider as a food for thought. Forfeit their salvation? Is that a new doctrine from you? Can you forfeit something you don't have? Reject grace? Can one reject grace when God gives it? If you say that Christ died for all mankind, which thereby having Christ to have given His life a ransom for all mankind, which further thereby redeeming all mankind, and for which He already had done and so stood effective, could one really change that and make that ineffective? Even superman can't do that, could he? Giving up His life as a ransom for all, would only make "all" to mean not all of mankind but all of those whom Christ redeemed with His blood. Your position and view have Jesus dying needlessly and senselessly for those whom He will not save, even knowing all along those whom He saves. I don't believe that Jesus would do such a waste nor would God allow such a waste, senseless, and meaningless act.
It seems to me that you see the death of Christ in a limited sense.
So, you believe that it was necessary for Christ to do all that just so a choice between life and death or a choice to be saved or not, could be offered to all? And that, even while you acknowledge and believe that salvation was always offered to all even from the beginning? Well, you have a lot of explaining to do, as to why would that be necessary at all for God to have to greatly humble Himself so much as to become a man, and even be in the form of a servant, and innocent as He is, be condemned as a criminal, undergo all the sufferings he suffered as written in scriptures, and die in the most humiliating and lowly death at the time, that is, by crucifixion? Why was that necessary, if and when, salvation, as you believe, is man's choosing of life over death, a choice that was ever available and offered to him to make, even at the beginning of time? So, please go on, tell us and explain.Hebrews 10:1-18 (KJV)
And you say "It is offered to ALL mankind even knowing few will respond." Tell us, why would He do that?
1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,
16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
Well, that sure says a lot about the law, the animal sacrifices and that of Christ's, but it doesn't really address the point of my questions. It does not explain why it would be necessary at all for God to have to greatly humble Himself so much as to become a man, and even be in the form of a servant, and innocent as He is, be condemned as a criminal, undergo all the sufferings he suffered as written in scriptures, and die in the most humiliating and lowly death at the time, that is, by crucifixion? It does not explain why was that necessary, if and when, salvation, as you believe, is man's choosing of life over death, a choice that was ever available and offered to him to make, even at the beginning of time?
Now, if you say that is your explanation, so be it. For I know that, you nor anyone with your view, does not have an explanation for those.
Then you are putting salvation in the hands of men.Not I but Jesus. Jesus is the one who sent us out into the world to preach the gospel of Christ. We are his workmen created in Christ to do this service for The Lord. His recorded word is what we are to spread. He gave us the gospel and sent us on our way. We are to speak the oracles of his word only not to add to or take from. His word as is recorded is all we have authority to teach.
While Jesus had given instructions to His apostles, it does not follow that by that, God had put upon the hands of men, the salvation of His people. If you will just read the Acts, you will find out the answer to the question I asked there which you did not answer (as also 4WD, who commented on this part of my post, did not care to answer this):
Who do you say directs the preaching of the gospel, who will preach, when it be preached, where it be preached, to whom will it be preached? Who do you say decides all those things?
If you found out the answer, I am sure it is not MAN.
Because you had not found the answer, I would guess that you did not care to read the book of ACTS.
Perhaps all Christian knows about what you say there. But we also know that not all have the same ministry and work for the Lord. There are preachers, teachers, etc. Scriptures says that as the body have many members, so is the church. All are not mouths you know.
Now the point of the questions is that, behind the instructions of Jesus to His disciples to preach the gospel and make disciples of all nations, in your reading of the Acts, who do you say directs the preaching of the gospel, who will preach, when it be preached, where it be preached, to whom will it be preached ~ who do you say decides all those things? If you had read the book of Acts as I suggested, and even better the NT epistles, you will find out that the answer to the question is the Holy Spirit, not Paul, not Peter, not James, not John, not any man.
The point being is that, it is on God, that salvation of people is dependent upon, not on man. While it is man who believes, man could only believe and have faith, when he is quickened by God and God brings the gospel to him for his hearing, in God's time and manner.