Timeline for Christ in the context of Predestination
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 12, 2014 at 15:35 | comment | added | gideon marx | Nope, Shabat starts in a few minutes for me. Happy celebration of the creation for everyone. | |
| Sep 12, 2014 at 15:31 | comment | added | user3961 | @gideonmarx Sure, you can cherry pick any perspective from the Bible. But I didn't pick the scope; the OP did. I also am not making any attempt to convince him of anything other than making sense for his question. Predestination almost always falls back to Calvin and his theology; some people just don't like the word Calvinism. So, I'm not going to discuss whether this stuff is Truth of not here in the comments, but I may in chat if you approach me there. I will discuss factual inaccuracies and logical fallacies on this post here, and I will discuss broader issues about the site on meta. | |
| Sep 12, 2014 at 15:28 | comment | added | gideon marx | How did the 'sacrifice' of Jesus change the world for the better? | |
| Sep 12, 2014 at 15:23 | comment | added | gideon marx | What are the sins of the world? | |
| Sep 12, 2014 at 15:21 | comment | added | gideon marx | As for all the rest, if there is no predestination then the point of the question is, why? Predestination is impossible to prove. By pulling a few verses, I can equally prove that God never required human sacrifice - that was the entire point of Abraham and Isaac. The aroma of death on the cross is not fragrant - so there has to be a very good reason. | |
| Sep 12, 2014 at 15:14 | comment | added | gideon marx | I think the edit was incorrect to tag it Calvinist and it should be ignored. I think the question is about Protestant or even Christianity in general. The arguments between Protestants and Catholics are highly informative in this regard. | |
| Sep 11, 2014 at 18:37 | comment | added | user3961 | As far as an unproven point, I'm not sure what exactly you are referring to. The scope was Calvinism; I answered from that view. Calvinists believe the Substitutionary Atonement of Christ. Their beliefs on predestination do not affect that the atonement was still necessary for God to accept sinners into the Kingdom. | |
| Sep 11, 2014 at 18:34 | comment | added | user3961 | @gideonmarx First, "All have fallen short of the glory of God" and "The wages of sin is death" and "God wishes none to be lost", therefore, "[Christ] gave Himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God as a fragrant aroma." Substitutionary Atonement is very well supported in the Scripture. Why would I have to name any sins at all? Unless I misunderstood what you are saying ... Second, what's all this about Christ dying to prove a point to the Pharisees? I've heard of theories such as this, but never heard of them supported well. | |
| Sep 11, 2014 at 16:29 | comment | added | gideon marx | I am not happy with your answer as it hinges on an unproven point. Christ's coming from a predestination view was unnecessary unless you can prove that God demanded a sacrifice for whatever sins you imagine (specify, and not the homosexual misunderstanding or the masturbation guilt-trips please - see if you can find some real sins for a change). Christ dying to prove a point about the laws as interpreted and propagated by the Pharisees though, is another story - and then predestination plays no role. | |
| Sep 11, 2014 at 15:58 | history | answered | user3961 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |