1st Corinthians 15 Universal atonement

[Quantrill]

@Iconoclast

Concerning your posts (107, 108, and 109).

Page after page of Pink doesn't answer my questions to you. Nor does it explain your position. It just explains Pinks. Because you can't reduce what you believe down to brief concise statements, can't or won't answer my questions, but instead give me page after page of Pink, that tells me you believe the doctrine of another, but you don't know it yourself.

Yes, I have Pinks book on Hebrews, as well as others of his. Pink is very verbose. Never saying in 50 words what he can say in 500.

Quantrill

 

[Barry Johnson]

For the elect, yes.

you've no idea what elect means my friend . = jews . Service and purpose . Not gnosctism.

 

[Barry Johnson]

Try answering the question.

Atonement is perfect payment for sin. Can a just God send a person whose sin has been perfectly paid for to hell?

If so, how can it be justified?

The atonement does not glorify anyone. This is so basic its silly your missing it ?

 

[Quantrill]

"Quantrill,t.



I do not think you are understanding what you are reading.




This quote agrees with exactly what I posted. You offer it here, but is the opposite of what you posted...you do not understand,

You do not understand Romans 5 either.

All men physically born in Adam, die spiritually and then physically and are in the realm of sin and will go into second death.

All who are IN the Last Adam, are born from above,spiritually....new birth.

Draw a big circle on a piece of paper.....mark it as All in Adam...lead to death.

Draw a second circle, Mark it All in Adam...
but then draw a circle inside that one, about 2/3 the size......Mark it All in saving Union with Jesus..

That inner circle are those elected before time and given by the Father to the Son.....Those are the ones Hebrews 2 is speaking of.

I just addressed what you said...

How is it the opposite of what I said? Here is your chance to be clear instead of providing more smoke.

I understand your need for smoke in giving multiple posts, filled with massive quotes and colors, but it doesn't mean you know what you're talking about.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

Here is what you failed to read by A.W. Pink;
CHAPTER - CHRIST SUPERIOR TO ANGELS.

First , they are one in sanctification, verse 11.

Second , they are one in family relationship, verses 11, 12a.

Third , they are one in worship, verse 12b.

Fourth , they are one in trust, verse 13.

Fifth , they are one in nature, verse 14.

Sixth , they are one in the line of promise, verse 16.

Seventh , they are one in experiencing temptation, verse 18.

It is remarkable to notice, however, that in this very passage which sets forth Christ’s identification with His people on earth, the Holy Spirit has carefully guarded the Savior’s glory and shows, also in a sevenfold way, His uniqueness:

First , He is “the Captain of our salvation” (verse 10), we are those whom He saves.

Second , He is the “Sanctifier,” we but the sanctified (verse 11).

Third , the fact that He is “not ashamed to call us brethren” (verse 11), clearly implies His superiority.

Fourth , He is the Leader of our praise and presents it to God (verse 12).

Fifth , mark the “I, and the children” in verse 13.

Sixth , note the contrast between “partakers” and “took part of” in verse 14.

Seventh , He is the Destroyer of the enemy, we but the delivered ones verses 14, 15. Thus, here as everywhere, He has the pre-eminence in all things.”

Another thing which comes out strikingly and plainly in the second half of Hebrews 2 is the distinguishing grace and predestinating love of God.

Christ is His “Elect” ( Isaiah 42:1), so called because His people are “chosen in Him” ( Ephesians 1:4). Mark how this also is developed in a sevenfold manner.

First , in “bringing many sons unto glory.” (verse 10).

Second , “the Captain of their salvation” (verse 10).

Third , “they who are sanctified,” set apart (verse 11).

Fourth , “in the midst of the church” (verse 12).

Fifth , “the children which God hath given me” (verse 13).

Sixth , “He took on Him the seed of Abraham” (verse 16), not Adam, but “Abraham,” the father of God’s chosen people.

Seventh , “to make reconciliation for the sins of the people” (verse 17).

If the reader will turn back to the third paragraph in article 10, and the second and third in article 11, he will find that we have called attention to twelve distinct reasons set forth by the apostle in Hebrews 2:9-16, which show the meetness and necessity of Christ’s becoming man and dying. In the verses which we are now to ponder, two more are advanced:

First , the incarnation and death of the Savior were imperative if He was to be “a merciful and faithful High Priest” (verse 17).

I read it. Big deal. I don't disagree with this. Of course Christ's death is imperative. That is not the issue we are discussing.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

Got it, you refuse to look at your contradictions.

You haven't presented any contradictions of mine. You refuse to answer my questions which clarifies my position.

Your doctrine of 'limited atonement' is a glass house. A house of cards.

Try answering the question.

Atonement is perfect payment for sin. Can a just God send a person whose sin has been perfectly paid for to hell?

If so, how can it be justified?

This question was already asked in post #(11) and answered in post #(16)

Christ paid the penalty for sin...period. That involves all sin that ever anyone does.

Just like when Adam sinned, all sinned. (Rom. 5:12) Is that just? According to God it is just. Therefore, all who are in Adam are sinners. Guilty and on the way to hell. Like a leaf on the Niagara river headed toward Niagara Falls. If one is born of Adam, he is a sinner. And all are born in Adam. And all are guilty due to one man's action of sin.

Because guilt of sin is levied against one because of who he is born of, one man Adam, then likewise, being declared righteous and free from the guilt of sin will be based on the action of another, one Man Christ. (Rom. 5:19) But, one must be in Christ for that to occur.

Whose race are you in....Adam or Christ? The First Adam, Adam. Or the Last Adam, Christ.

In other words, Christ dying for all sin, provided the way for salvation, provided the way to be removed from Adam's act. It didn't change Adam's act. Nor did it change anyone's state who were in Adam. They are sinners and on their way to hell. Just because Christ died for all Sin, didn't remove anyone from Adam.

Being part of the First Adam was due to physical birth alone. Being part of the Last Adam is due to faith resulting in spiritual birth. Faith removes one from the First Adam and places him in the Last Adam. (1 Cor. 15:17,22,45) If one does not exercise that faith towards Christ and God, he remains in the First Adam and on the way to hell.

So, yes, Christ paid the penalty for Sin...all sin. The way is provided so that faith can remove any from Adam and place them in Christ. Rejection of God and Christ, of that faith, leaves one in Adam, even though all sin has been paid. It leaves one guilty of sin and destined for hell.

God is perfectly justified. The price has been paid. The invitation is legit. Any who come in faith will be saved. Any who do not, go to hell, because they have refused that, and remain in Adam.

Quantrill

Quantrill

 

[Barry Johnson]

Universal atonement means that all humans are made holy. Does God fail to save those whom He has made holy and perfect?

Were ' set apart ' , made holy by regeneration, by the Holy Spirit , by receiving Jesus . This didn't happen on the cross. It happened after we believed. Notice Eph 2 which of course is after the atonement. Notice your included here
11¶Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

Calvinism flips everything back to front. Reformed theology is the most dangerous theology to come out of Christendom. Because of its acceptance within Christianity. Barely anyone really questions ALL 5 points .

 

[Quantrill]

I believe there is something that those who hold to 'limited atonement' need to carefully consider.

You cannot hold to 'limited atonement' and 'Federal Headship'. The doctrine of limited atonement does away with federal headship.

If Christ in the atonement, does not represent all of Adam's race, then He is not the Last Adam. He is but Christ dying for the elect.

The One representing the all is the only way Federal Headship works. If Adam represented the all, but Christ does not represent the same all, then Federal Headship is done, broken.

Now we have a serious problem. We can no longer claim salvation on the basis of the One representing the all. For that reason we must ask, who is the lucky person for whom Christ died? For Christ is but one Man. Is it you? What are the chances?

Don't say Christ died for all the elect, as there is no way Federal Headship can work as Christ didn't represent the all that Adam represented.

Quantrill

 

[Dave G]

wrong, the sinner is saved AFTER the repent of their sins and accept Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour. What is "potential" on the Cross, for the human race, becomes "actual" when the sinner repents and believes. Simple!

Please show the Scriptures that state that a person becomes saved after they repent and believe.
In addition, please show the Scriptures that declare that the atonement is "potential".

I'm curious as to how you see it, so perhaps an in-depth review of God's word would help me to better understand it..

 

[Barry Johnson]

He also limits the efficacy of the atonement by saying those who don't believe don't get saved so he also limits the atonement he doesn't have an unlimited atonement because he speaking of a potential atonement that doesn't actually save anyone

The atonement itself doesn't save anyone. So this ' potential ' ' limited ' , ' unlimited ' 25% off discount ,whilst offers last atonement is ridiculous. No one was saved by the atonement. Were saved by regeneration.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Please show the Scriptures that state that a person becomes saved after they repent and believe.

Jonah 3:6-10, "The word reached the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, removed his robe, covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. And he issued a proclamation and published through Nineveh, “By the decree of the king and his nobles: Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything. Let them not feed or drink water, but let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and let them call out mightily to God. Let everyone turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands (repent). Who knows? God may turn and relent and turn from his fierce anger, so that we may not perish.” When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way (repented), God relented of the disaster that he had said he would do to them, and he did not do it."

Mark 1:15, "and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”
Luke 13:3, 5, "No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish...No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”
Luke 18:13, "But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner! (repented)’"
Luke 24:47, "and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem"
Acts 2:37-38, "Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."
Acts 3:19, "Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out,"

ANTHING else is a FALSE gospel that can NEVER save any sinner!!!

 

[Iconoclast]

I believe there is something that those who hold to 'limited atonement' need to carefully consider.

You cannot hold to 'limited atonement' and 'Federal Headship'. The doctrine of limited atonement does away with federal headship.

If Christ in the atonement, does not represent all of Adam's race, then He is not the Last Adam. He is but Christ dying for the elect.

The One representing the all is the only way Federal Headship works. If Adam represented the all, but Christ does not represent the same all, then Federal Headship is done, broken.

Now we have a serious problem. We can no longer claim salvation on the basis of the One representing the all. For that reason we must ask, who is the lucky person for whom Christ died? For Christ is but one Man. Is it you? What are the chances?

Don't say Christ died for all the elect, as there is no way Federal Headship can work as Christ didn't represent the all that Adam represented.

Quantrill

Sorry you do not understand what is being taught.Today is another day however,you can try once again.

 

[Iconoclast]

The atonement itself doesn't save anyone. So this ' potential ' ' limited ' , ' unlimited ' 25% off discount ,whilst offers last atonement is ridiculous. No one was saved by the atonement. Were saved by regeneration.

The atonement of Jesus does not save? Ok...

 

[Iconoclast]

I read it. Big deal. I don't disagree with this. Of course Christ's death is imperative. That is not the issue we are discussing.

Quantrill

Big deal???I can see you are to be taken seriously.

 

[SavedByGrace]

In addition, please show the Scriptures that declare that the atonement is "potential".

very simply put, when Jesus Christ died on the cross, this was for the whole human race, none excepted. I again return to the verse that some call, "the Gospel in a nutshell", John 3:16. I think that all will agree that Jesus' use of "world" here is the "whole human race", which is what the greater majority (95%) of Greek lexicons, studies say. This is to do with how far the Lord actually "loves" this fallen race. We are then told that "whosoever" (the Greek lexicon of Liddell & Scott, say that the Greek word, πας, can also have the meaning, "every single one"; in Homer's Greek, "each, every, the whole"), from this "whole human race", were to "believe" (including repentance, as in Mark 1:15), will be saved. If as some suppose, that a ceartin class "the elect" were only provided for on the cross, then this offer of salvation to "whole human race", is completely meaningless, and nothing more than a sham!

First John chapter 2 also tells about this, "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world". "Propitiation" is from "ἱλασμός", where the meaning is, "a means of appeasing, propitiation". But it is also used in the LXX for "forgiveness". The Reformed commentary by Jamieson, Faussett, and Brown, is helpful on this text:

"Also for the sins of the whole world. Christ's advocacy is limited to believers (1Jn_2:1; 1Jn_1:7): His propitiation extends as widely as sin: note, 2Pe_2:1, "the whole world" cannot be restricted to the believing portion (cf. 1Jn_4:14 and 1Jn_5:19). 'Thou, too, art part of the world: thine heart cannot think, The Lord died for Peter and Paul, but not for me' (Luther).

 

[Iconoclast]

How is it the opposite of what I said? Here is your chance to be clear instead of providing more smoke.

I understand your need for smoke in giving multiple posts, filled with massive quotes and colors, but it doesn't mean you know what you're talking about.

Quantrill

If a blind person cannot see a rainbow does that mean it does not exist?

 

[Iconoclast]

@Iconoclast

Concerning your posts (107, 108, and 109).

Page after page of Pink doesn't answer my questions to you. Nor does it explain your position. It just explains Pinks. Because you can't reduce what you believe down to brief concise statements, can't or won't answer my questions, but instead give me page after page of Pink, that tells me you believe the doctrine of another, but you don't know it yourself.

Yes, I have Pinks book on Hebrews, as well as others of his. Pink is very verbose. Never saying in 50 words what he can say in 500.

Quantrill

Pink is verbose???Don't you just hate when he lists all those troublesome bible verses?If you have no need for his commentary I will take it off your hands and give it to someone who will use it.

 

[Iconoclast]

How is it the opposite of what I said? Here is your chance to be clear instead of providing more smoke.

I understand your need for smoke in giving multiple posts, filled with massive quotes and colors, but it doesn't mean you know what you're talking about.

Quantrill

Your failure to grasp what is being said here,in a way a small child could understand demonstrates that you do not want an answer

 

[AustinC]

No you didn't understand my position.

If so, it's because your position is not taught in the Bible.

 

[AustinC]

Do you believe you have to endure to the end to be saved ?

Do you believe that the atonement pays for all sins?

To answer your question:
If endurance were up to my efforts, I would fail like Peter in the Temple courts at Jesus trial. However, just as my being made alive with Christ is entirely an effort by God, so my perseverance is entirely an effort by God.
God ordains my perseverance.

Our core difference is that you view yourself as co-pilot with God and think your efforts save you. I view myself as a wretch whom God must choose to save by His efforts alone.

I am very grateful to my Savior.