• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Not an either or atonement.

Status
Not open for further replies.

37818

Well-Known Member
Jesus was not telling Judas in Luke 22 he was shedding his blood for him. Read it again.
". . . Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. . . ."
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
". . . Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. . . ."
And you have to show HOW the you includes Judas in the light of the REST of Scripture.
 

37818

Well-Known Member
And you have to show HOW the you includes Judas in the light of the REST of Scripture.
Those Scriptures are being denied too. It makes little difference. Christ saves and secures the salvation of those who believe and are born from God.
 

Brightfame52

Well-Known Member
". . . Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. . . ."
I dont believe judas partook of the lords supper, I believe he had left following the passover meal which was at the same table. But even if he was there and heard the words, Jesus wasnt talking to him personally but the other 11.

And your stance here confirms that you dont believe that Christs death produces a saving result for them He died for.
 

37818

Well-Known Member
I dont believe judas partook of the lords supper, I believe he had left following the passover meal which was at the same table.
Well, what you believe is from the irregular churches. Luke wrote in order and from above, per Luke 1:3. And John makes it clear Judas was there, the supper being ended. This view changed in the regarding John's account do what I understand is bad scholarship.
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Well, what you believe is from the irregular churches. Luke wrote in order and from above, per Luke 1:3. And John makes it clear Judas was there, the supper being ended. This view changed in the regarding John's account do what I understand is bad scholarship.
Because it does not fit your narrative?
 

Brightfame52

Well-Known Member
Well, what you believe is from the irregular churches. Luke wrote in order and from above, per Luke 1:3. And John makes it clear Judas was there, the supper being ended. This view changed in the regarding John's account do what I understand is bad scholarship.
I have said what I had to say about that friend.
 

37818

Well-Known Member
The particular redemption is not denied in the general redemption.

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

1 Timothy 2:6, ". . . Who gave himself a ransom for all, . . ."

2 Corinthians 5:14, ". . . we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: . . ."

As anyone can see and understand, the Scripture explicitly teaches the general redemption.

Luke 22:20-21, ". . . saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. . . . "

Deuteronomy 18:19, ". . . And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. . . ."
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
The particular redemption is not denied in the general redemption.

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

1 Timothy 2:6, ". . . Who gave himself a ransom for all, . . ."

2 Corinthians 5:14, ". . . we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: . . ."

As anyone can see and understand, the Scripture explicitly teaches the general redemption.

Luke 22:20-21, ". . . saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. . . . "

Deuteronomy 18:19, ". . . And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. . . ."
Anyone can see you took those verses out of context of their passages and ignored the whole of Scripture.
 

37818

Well-Known Member
There is no evidence that the concept of the general redemption is not true. Nor that the Biblical general redemption disallows it's particular redemption. Both things are true about the redemption.
 

Brightfame52

Well-Known Member
The particular redemption is not denied in the general redemption.

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

1 Timothy 2:6, ". . . Who gave himself a ransom for all, . . ."

2 Corinthians 5:14, ". . . we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: . . ."

As anyone can see and understand, the Scripture explicitly teaches the general redemption.

Luke 22:20-21, ". . . saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. . . . "

Deuteronomy 18:19, ". . . And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. . . ."
Its a contradiction.
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
There is no evidence that the concept of the general redemption is not true. Nor that the Biblical general redemption disallows it's particular redemption. Both things are true about the redemption.
Except Jesus said he laid his life down for the sheep.
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
That is not in dispute. The general redemption includes the sheep. The particular redemption is exclusively the sheep. In neither are the sheep excluded.
I don't understand how you think you can have both at the same time. When you say general redemption, what do you mean? Maybe I am missing something here.
 

37818

Well-Known Member
I don't understand how you think you can have both at the same time. When you say general redemption, what do you mean? Maybe I am missing something here.
I am of the persuasion Christ bought the gift of salvation, that being the general redemption for all humanity. Specifically to secure His sheep. The lost will have no excuse. 2 Corinthians 4:3-4. Matthew 7:21-23. 2 Peter 2:17-22.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top