Limited Atonement: Let's set the record straight.

I think you mean "Why is the term WHOLE WORLD ... really supposed to mean WHOLE WORLD as written in 1 John 2:2 when that would not fit Calvinism"??

Is that not a more direct statement of the question?

 

Yes and why did they call upon the name of the LORD?

"I will draw ALL mankind unto Me" John 12:32 -- they were drawn and decided to accept
"I STAND at the door and knock if anyone hears My voice AND OPENS the door -- I WILL come in" Rev 3

 

I gladly believe the serpent is a type. The issue, however, is still that applying the concept of "atonement" to the serpent is something that the text never does. If the Old Testament text doesn't apply that verbiage to the serpent, is it not putting words in Jesus' mouth for us to do so?

Also, though "the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin" the text in the Old Testament does call it an atonement. Though, I will argue there can be no atonement with bulls and goats if Christ isn't coming (as He fulfills the type of the sacrificial system). Even then, we should ask: If the blood of bulls and goats can't take away sin--and that was the remedy given for sin by God Himself--how can a brass serpent, especially when the term "atonement" isn't used in the text?

Agreed--on the enjoy-ability of this discussion. Obviously, we don't agree on the extent of the analogy, but that's why the discussion is enjoyable!

A further question is this: What does "atonement" mean and to whom is atonement made?

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

Yeah... that's not what Revelation 3 is talking about....

The Archangel

 

Jesus death had infinite value, as God died upon the Cross, and His death applied in a saving sense just towards the intended ones by God, His elect!

 

Nope. Not at all.

The Archangel

 

The basic question would be 'why not?"
For if true, than God desire to save all sinners is being stopped in its tracks once again by human free will!

 

That promise was made to those already saved, not to the lost!

 

While i mostly agree....i find calvinists saying that there are "Warning verses", not really directed at "genuine believers in the assembly." Maybe this is one of those "Warning Verses" that if there are any unrepetant sinners in the congregation, they'd hear that message and be saved.

 

I think the context though fits that Jesus wants to make sure that they are not growing cold and going luke warm, to make they actually want Him there in their midst!

 

You are confusing Calvinism with a rather extreme form of Hyper-Calvinism.

 

First, you need to copy and past from a Calvinist website a definition of "Limited Atonement." Otherwise they claim your view is not correct. It is a ploy.

Next, you need to make clear God desires all persons to be saved, according to His redemption plan. Thus only those whose faith He credits as righteous are saved, but the opportunity for salvation is provided by Christ being the propitiation for the sin of the whole world, 1 John 2:2.

Next, you must address the idea that our sin burden was removed, not when Christ died, but when God transferred us into Christ.

You should consider your efforts successful when you crystallize your understanding as being consistent with all scripture.

For example if those to be saved had been chosen individually before creation, why does scripture say those never to be saved were bought by the blood of Jesus?

 

I assume the obvious --- is obvious.


As a Calvinist - does the possibility even exist in your mind that your definition and assumptions about words, phrases, and certain verses may be wrong to one degree or another?


Given the text
He is the "Atoning Sacrifice for OUR sins and not for our sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1 John 2:2

Should "Whole WORLD" be downsized and re-imagined as "the FEW of Matthew 7"? Or can we just leave it as "WHOLE WORLD"?

Many Calvinists will insist outright that it must be downsized to the "FEW of Matthew 7"