World or elect

The Day of Atonement: for Egypt or for Israel? Was Egypt represented by a stone on the breastplate of the high priest? Tyre? Sidon?

Who was represented? The Elect.

When the world is spoken of in regard to the Atonement, it means the elect of every nation. It is not speaking of a universal atonement.

 

Who said the blood was for the elect only? Are you trying to start a fight?

 

I don't believe in universal salvation, but Scripture says Christ died for the world, and John says he was the propitiation for the sins of the world.

1John 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

How is that possible? Not sure. I just know that's what Scripture says so I believe it.

 

Because atonement is used to mean very different things, it is hard to make any sense out of the Reformed view. They have been taught, that when Christ died on the cross 2000 ;years ago, He paid for the sins of the previously chosen elect. So if someone like myself says Christ died for all mankind per 1 John 2:2, they smear me, saying I am advocating universal atonement. So the discussion turns into a "I am not, yes you are" food fight. They do this on purpose, to obfuscate their actual bogus doctrine.

An alternate view is that Christ paid the ransom for the whole world, such that anyone God puts into Christ, their sins are taken away. So the actual atonement occurs when the sinner is united with Christ, and not when He died 2000 years ago. Two radically different views being presented with the same word, atonement.

To nullify 1 John 2:2, they redefine the meaning of world, saying it means this here, that over there, and this other thing elsewhere.
But John almost always uses the word translated "world" to refer to mankind, or the corrupt value system of fallen mankind.

Paying the ransom for the whole world of mankind does not save anyone, or remove the specific sins of anyone. But it does mean anyone of the world, when transferred into Christ, has his or her specific sin burden (what God holds against him or her) removed.

 

The intention of the death of Jesus by God was to either have all sinners saved by it, or just to have His elect saved by it.

ALL, except for Universalists see it as saving the Elect, the real division is between those like me who see the elect as willed by God, and those who see Us choosing Jesus and thus becoming elect by our will.

 

Jesus death made it possible for God to have just means to redeem all sinners, but God chose to redeem out for Himself his elect in Christ.

 

You sure?

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!​

The Bible says not all are saved, but it also says Christ took away the sins of the world. I realize this throws a monkey wrench in all kinds of theological systems.

It also takes me back to ancient Israel when Moses covered all the Israelites with blood. But later they turned out to be a generation of unbelievers. Not easy to understand, but that's what Scripture says.

 

Ina sense Jesus died for all sinners, as His death was sufficient to be able to have God save all sinners, but in the real sense, just died in the stead of the elect alone!

 

You're trying to reconcile these ideas logically. I get that. I'm just in a place where after many years of trying to reconcile these things, I've given up. They might just be too wonderful to fully understand. Still looking into explanations, but no longer need to have it all worked out. I think Jesus really died for all and really took away the sins of all, and yet not all will end up in heaven, only believers whom God elected to save. I admit I don't perfectly understand it. Maybe I'll get some good ideas from this thread.

 

A thought:

What about the blasphemy of the Spirit? Could that be a puzzle piece in all this?

 

I never made mention of believers.