Bill, Thank you. Your words very much touch my heart. You once said in a post, �I believe the Bible does teach that salvation is entirely of the Lord. It is in appreciation of his love for me that I am obedient of him. I would be irresponsible to be anything less than appreciative and thus obedient.� What a profound statement! Finally, unlike anything I had ever heard before, truth I can believe in. And such good news! Jesus Christ is central to all the information you have posted. Because of the truth you have brought to these pages, I am able to find comfort knowing that my daughter IS safely in the arms of Jesus. It is obvious that you have spent an incredible amount of time and passion in your search for the truth you have found. How blessed I feel that you have the wonderful ability to then teach what your commitment has led you to know. God bless you and comfort you and strengthen you also. Please try not to become too discouraged. Sherrie
Sherrie, I am so sorry for your loss. Know this (I know you do) that your daughter is safely in the arms of Jesus. God bless you and comfort you and strengthen you. I love you, Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 5:39 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Calvinism > Hi David, > Below is the entire sentence Bill sent. > Your reply to this appalls me. > You say you think you can think of worse losses. I can't. I've lost a child. > You say you are getting a little nervous when you hear such superlatives being > thrown around. > You say such usually indicates excessive emotion and hyperbole is expected > shortly..:-) > There weren't enough superlatives to describe what I felt when I lost my > daughter and I don't believe the emotions I felt during that time were an > exaggeration. > I cannot imagine a greater loss. > Bill's words do speak healing to my soul. Very, very much so. > It might be wise to think about comments before you state them. These appear > heartless to me. Almost dismissive. You may have never experienced the loss > of a child, but many of us have. Have you lost a child? > Your tone/negative inflection in response to Bill's post saddens/floors me > greatly. > Your smiley faces appear a contradiction to your responses. They do not help > alleviate the negative tone. > You say near the end of your post that you promise to discuss with Bill > nicely. > Given the negative inflection of your responses I know that I'd be hesitant to > continue. > Sherrie > > Either they are noncommittal and thus have no words of comfort for those who > have suffered the worst imaginable loss, or they hold to some sort of second, > unspoken gospel which does not include their prerequisite, or they themselves > hold out no hope for children who die without faith. > > Bill wrote: > > I believe this passage does mean that all receive > > the gift of life and that this gift is automatically > > afforded to us all whether or not we put our trust > > and faith in Christ. > > Wow! Bill, you sure do know how to shock me. I'm listening, but I'm on > the edge of my seat! This is fun... > > Bill wrote: > > The Scriptures speak of two deaths. The first death > > is defeated in Christ's resurrection. > > Wait a minute... everyone partakes of the first death. Everyone. > Christ did not eliminate this from the destiny of men, did he? The > first death is defeated in Christ's resurrection, I agree, but that > defeat is by undoing the first death through resurrection, not by > preventing the death. We all partake of the first death, but because of > Christ, some of us will escape the second death. Yes? No? > > Bill wrote: > > We all share in the victory of Christ's victory over > > sin, death, and the devil. > > By the phrase "we all," do you mean all men everywhere, including the > Ted Bundy's and Charles Manson's and Jeffery Dahmer's of the world? > > When I read you say that we share in Christ's victory over sin, that > means to me that we will walk as he walked in regards to sin and no > longer continue to sin. When I read you to say that we share in > Christ's victory over death, I read that to mean that we will defeat > death in the same way, through the resurrection. When I read you to say > that we all share in Christ's victory over the devil, that means that we > will resist him as Christ did, and escape his power and wiling ways. > > Bill wrote: > > We all live because Christ is the justification > > of life. The first death is therefore not the problem. > > We all share in Christ's resurrection. We are all > > called to live this life in faithful obedience to him > > who gave it to us. > > Again, by "we all," do you mean all of mankind, or do you mean those who > have been called of God, all the elect? > > Bill wrote: > > How then does this view differ from "universalism"? > > Keep in mind the second death. Before considering it, > > however, let us talk about those among us who die in > > infancy or childhood or early adulthood (?) before > > having placed their faith in Jesus Christ. I have > > to tell you, David, this speaks to the one thing > > which disturbs me more than anything else: Christians > > who make faith a necessary prerequisite to salvation > > are really quite inconsiderate. > > Wow! I'm listening, but still on the edge of my seat! > > Bill wrote: > > Either they are noncommittal and thus have no words > > of comfort for those who have suffered the worst > > imaginable loss, > > I think I can think of worse losses, so I'm getting a little nervous > when I hear such superlatives being thrown around. Such usually > indicates excessive emotion and hyperbole is expected shortly... :-) > > Bill wrote: > > or they hold to some sort of second, unspoken gospel > > which does not include their prerequisite, or they > > themselves hold out no hope for children who die > > without faith. Whatever the case, it is terribly > > sick and sad. There is good news for those who have > > lost a child, and that good news is imbedded in the > > Gospel and that Gospel is right here in these passages. > > So let me get this right. If a doctrine brings bad news, terrible news, > then something is wrong with that doctrine? The law brought > condemnation, does that mean we should question the holiness and > usefulness of the law? I think you are arguing a non-sequitur. > > Bill wrote: > > The question is, do these young ones go to hell > > when they die, and this because they failed to > > believe in Jesus Christ? I say absolutely not. > > They are secure in Christ and we can be sure of > > that. Their security is absolute. They are > > eternally secure and this is because it is not > > faith which saves them -- or anyone else. Therefore, > > a lack of faith cannot send them to hell. Jesus > > Christ saves period! -- not faith, not repentance, > > not baptism, not sanctification, not works: > > Jesus Christ alone. And he saves these little ones. > > His faith, his repentance, his baptism, his > > sanctification, his works, his vicarious nature: > > He saves us all. The passages under discussion -- > > Rom 5.12ff and IICor 5.14-21 -- make that abundantly > > clear. These young ones are secure in Christ and we > > can know that, because they have done nothing to > > reject him. And there's the key. The first death, > > their death, is swallowed up in victory. Resurrection > > to eternal life is theirs in Christ. > > Ok, Bill, now the cat is out of the bag, as they say. :-) I am almost > speechless, shaking my head in disbelief. I am on the one hand so glad > that you have spoken your mind and laid it out there, but on the other > hand, I'm not buying what you are selling. :-) I have so many > questions. I have so many comments. I do not know where to begin. > > First, I am confused by your kind words toward Calvin, because based > upon your theology, Calvin surely would have burned you at the stake > along with Michael Servetus. You argue the very points he condemns > vociferously in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. You have > gotten rid of the problem of original sin basically by saying that all > children have been sanctified and saved by Christ's work on the cross, > even before they are born. While Calvin argues that faith is put in the > heart of the newborn miraculously and that baptism will save them from > their fallen state, you argue that the children are already redeemed as > they come into the world, and that they are secure in their salvation as > long as they never reject Christ! Please tell me whether or not I am > hearing you right, because I can hardly believe that I am hearing this > from you. We must progress slowly through this, because surely I am > misunderstanding you the way that I was said to have misunderstood > Lance. > > Bill wrote: > > It is the "second death" that damns people to hell. > > Those who suffer the second death are those who lose > > their salvation, the very salvation provided them > > in and through Christ's life, death, and resurrection. > > So in your view, everyone is saved by Christ's work, but some people > reject their salvation. Am I really hearing you right? > > You make eternal judgment not based upon works, not based upon how men > have lived, but upon whether or not they reject Christ, which has > already been fully formed in them from birth. Am I hearing you right? > > Bill wrote: > > These are those who volitionally reject Jesus Christ. > > These are those who trample under foot the Son of God > > and regard as unclean the blood of the covenant by > > which he was sanctified. They insult the Spirit of grace. > > They blaspheme the Holy Spirit. They commit the sin > > which leads to death, the unpardonable sin. Because > > in their rejection of Christ they deny the Lord who > > redeemed them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. > > These are those who do not overcome. It is not then > > just the absence of faith which sends people to hell, > > it is the outright rejection of Jesus Christ that damns > > them. > > Well, let's see. I am trying to inventory your disagreements with > Calvinism. > > 1. You disagree with Limited Atonement. > > 2. You disagree with infant baptism. Are you a Quaker in your view on > Baptism? (By the way, Jim Elsman is.) > > 3. You disagree with the role of faith. > > 4. You disagree with Total Depravity in regards to any practical > application of it, because it has all been taken care of by Christ. > > 5. You disagree with Calvin on Original Sin in that Calvin taught that > all are born guilty, erroneously assuming that there can be no > condemnation without guilt. > > So, why is it that you appreciate Calvin? > > Basically, it sounds like you believe in universalism with a twist. > Everyone is automatically saved in Christ, but some might volitionally > reject him and jump ship, and thereby be confined to hell. If we add > Jonathan's concept of hell being in Christ, then all are still in > Christ, with some volitionally choosing hell in Christ and others > accepting the gift and not choosing to move their residence to hell. > This is getting a bit confusing. :-) > > For some reason, the idea of ETERNAL JUDGMENT is getting completely lost > in this discussion. I'm going to wait to hear your response to my > comments. I have been told that I have misunderstood you guys before, > so surely I must be misunderstanding again. I can't tell you how many > problems I have with this theological bombshell you have just dropped > upon us. :-) > > I promise to discuss with you nicely, so please do not think you have to > stop talking about it. If what you believe is truth, then it would be > able to hold up to the scrutiny of Scripture, right? I really think it > would be good if we could get to the bottom of this. > > Peace be with you. > David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. > > ---------- > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know > how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org > > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a > friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------- > This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. > http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ > > > ---------- > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org > > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. > > ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
