Saturday, March 28, 2009
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
An Encouragement and Precaution for Parents
By John Piper
Desiring God Blog
Jesus tells of two sons:
What do you think? A man had two sons. And he went to the first and said, “Son, go and work in the vineyard today.” And he answered, “I will not,” but afterward he changed his mind and went. And he went to the other son and said the same. And he answered, “I go, sir,” but did not go. (Matthew 21:28-30)
I draw this advice for parents from these words: Do not despair of the rebel, and do not assume the heart of the compliant child is with you.
Which means practically, pray like crazy for both of them. And keep showing both of them the gospel of undeserved, blood-bought grace.
Desiring God Blog
Pure Church: Why the Time Magazine Trumpeting of New Calvinism Is a Bad Thing
Thabiti Anyabwile has a great post in response to the Times Magazine article about the 'New Calvinism'.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
Limited Atonement
All Christians believe in limited atonement.
“No,” you say. “I don’t.”
Oh? Well, let’s see. Do you believe that God has the desire for all to be saved?
“Certainly.”
Do you believe He has the power to save all men?
“Of course.”
Then, why aren’t all saved?
“Because some won’t believe.”
So, He limited His own power to save on the basis of man’s willingness to believe?
“Well . . . “
Let’s take it a step further. The atonement didn’t actually bring God and men together, did it?
“What do you mean?”
Christ’s death didn’t actually atone for all men-the word means to bring about at-one-ment (bringing God and man together after their estrangement because of sin).
“Well, no. But it made atonement possible for all.”
So, there, you’ve admitted that Jesus’ atonement was limited-only those who believe are saved. If what He did actually atones-and not merely makes atonement possible-then all would be saved. If He paid the penalty for everyone’s sin, everyone would go to heaven because his sins would be paid for. God couldn’t punish Jesus and the unbeliever if the latter’s sins were actually paid for. That would be double jeopardy.
“Yes, but Jesus made salvation possible for all.”
So, then, if all are not saved
1.What Jesus did on the cross was limited by man; not for all, since the sins of only those who believe are forgiven.
2.What Jesus did on the cross was limited in its power to save.
3.What Jesus did on the cross was ineffective (limited) in the case of most men.
4.What Jesus did on the cross was limited (incomplete) because it requires man to make it effective.
If the Arminian is correct, Jesus‘ death saves no one. His death atones for no one. It is the Doctrine of Total Limitation! It is limited in what it can do because it depends upon man’s belief to make it effective. It was partially (limited) in its effect. The Arminian believes in atonement that is limited in its power to save. That’s total limitation.
Calvinists, on the other hand, believe that the death of Christ was effective and actually brings about the salvation of all those for whom He died. There is no waste in the atonement, it effects atonement for all of the elect. No one is lost for whom Jesus died. All of those whom God intended to be saved will be saved because Jesus’ death actually procured salvation for them rather than simply making it available.
This is from Jay Adams' Blog
“No,” you say. “I don’t.”
Oh? Well, let’s see. Do you believe that God has the desire for all to be saved?
“Certainly.”
Do you believe He has the power to save all men?
“Of course.”
Then, why aren’t all saved?
“Because some won’t believe.”
So, He limited His own power to save on the basis of man’s willingness to believe?
“Well . . . “
Let’s take it a step further. The atonement didn’t actually bring God and men together, did it?
“What do you mean?”
Christ’s death didn’t actually atone for all men-the word means to bring about at-one-ment (bringing God and man together after their estrangement because of sin).
“Well, no. But it made atonement possible for all.”
So, there, you’ve admitted that Jesus’ atonement was limited-only those who believe are saved. If what He did actually atones-and not merely makes atonement possible-then all would be saved. If He paid the penalty for everyone’s sin, everyone would go to heaven because his sins would be paid for. God couldn’t punish Jesus and the unbeliever if the latter’s sins were actually paid for. That would be double jeopardy.
“Yes, but Jesus made salvation possible for all.”
So, then, if all are not saved
1.What Jesus did on the cross was limited by man; not for all, since the sins of only those who believe are forgiven.
2.What Jesus did on the cross was limited in its power to save.
3.What Jesus did on the cross was ineffective (limited) in the case of most men.
4.What Jesus did on the cross was limited (incomplete) because it requires man to make it effective.
If the Arminian is correct, Jesus‘ death saves no one. His death atones for no one. It is the Doctrine of Total Limitation! It is limited in what it can do because it depends upon man’s belief to make it effective. It was partially (limited) in its effect. The Arminian believes in atonement that is limited in its power to save. That’s total limitation.
Calvinists, on the other hand, believe that the death of Christ was effective and actually brings about the salvation of all those for whom He died. There is no waste in the atonement, it effects atonement for all of the elect. No one is lost for whom Jesus died. All of those whom God intended to be saved will be saved because Jesus’ death actually procured salvation for them rather than simply making it available.
This is from Jay Adams' Blog
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
A girl and her doll
My girlie can wear a barrette. Well, barely. But her hair is definitely coming in nicely!
Nothing is sweeter than a girl with her daddy...
Nothing is sweeter than a girl with her daddy...
A Quote
"If the devil comes to my door with his horns visible,I will never let him in; but if he comes with his hat on as a respectable gentleman, he is at once admitted.The metaphor may be very strange, but it is quite true--many a man has taken in an evil thing, because it has been varnished and glossed over, and not apparently an evil; and he has thought in his heart, there is not much harm in it; so he has let in the little thing, and it has been like the breaking forth of water- the first drop has brought after it a torrent.
The beginning has been but the beginning of a fearful end."
-Charles Haddon Spurgeon