Arminianism is not universalism because of Lev 16

[BobRyan]

Leviticus 16 is where we find God's teaching on Atonement. In this case the "Day of Atonement".

It explains how it is that a universal atoning sacrifice "For Our sins and not for Our sins only but for the sins of the whole WORLD" 1 John 2:2 - does not result in universalism. Because the "Atoning Sacrifice" depicted as full and complete in Lev 16:15 when the "Sin offering" is slain - is not the laast work of Christ in Atonement.

Rather on the "Day of Atonement" both the work of Christ as "Sin Offering" AND his work as "High Priest" have to be accomplished.

Once this larger Bible scope for Atonement is completed - all issues are settled, all cases decided - no more "crossing over". It is the Rev 22:10-12 case where no one crosses over from lost to saved, or saved to lost.

I understand if the Atonement was taken to incorporate the entire work of Christ - perhaps with Paul’s statement regarding our faith being founded in the Resurrection as a summary of this work or the gospel in its entirety. When you say that once atonement is completed all lines are drawn, all issues settled and all cases decided, where does the Resurrection and the faith of those who believe fit in (or is this incorporated in your view of the Atonement)?

The Day of Atonement in Lev 16 begins with what 1John 2:2 "The Atoning Sacrifice" -- the cross. There is no way to have the Atonement teaching of Lev 16 as a non-Cross subject.

But the Atonement includes more than the work of Christ on the Cross (as if He had not done anything gospel-significant since) rather it points to the work of Christ as High Priest - equally essential in the entire subject. And all of it as God's plan of salvation.

Arminianism would be universalism if we could ignore all the details after the cross (after the atoning sacrifice Lev 16:15) because Christ died for our sins and for the sins of the Whole World.

But in "atonement" the entire program is encompassed not only the sacrifice but also the individual case-by-case application of that atoning sacrifice - as Paul points out in Heb 9 regrading the work of Christ for each individual cleansing the conscience from sin.

However once that entire - larger scope of atonement is over - nothing is left - you are at Rev 22:10-11 "let him who is filthy be filthy still.... let him who is holy be holy still". And so the sanctuary in heaven shuts down as we see in Rev 15:8 and then comes the 7 last plagues (Rev 16) and 2nd coming. Because there is no more "crossing over" from lost to saved or from saved to lost.

All issues resolved, all cases settled.


in Christ,

B ob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by Iconoclast
pt2

12. If ALL the sins of ALL men were laid upon Christ, and the only sin which God now imputes to any is the refusal to receive His Son, then it inevitably follows that all the heathen who have lived since the crucifixion and have never heard of Christ, will certainly be saved. There is no other alternative possible. Not having heard of Christ, they cannot be charged with rejecting Him, and if all their other sins were atoned for (as we are asked to believe) then, necessarily, they must stand guiltless before God. But if this were true, then John 14:6 would be untrue, for there the recorded declaration of Christ is, "No man cometh unto the Father but by Me."t2

The Calvinist definition for "Atonement" does not get to any of the work of Christ beyond the cross. But in the Bible the atonement includes the work of Christ as High Priest in Heb 8 and 9 - and to this very day Christ is our High Priest.

Hebrews points to Christ as our High priest in heaven in both Heb 8 and 9 and He does his ministry - in heaven - seated at the right hand of the Father.

Heb 8
The New Priestly Service

8 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man.
3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer. 4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law; 5 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. For He said, “See that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” 6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.


Heb 4
14 Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

"We HAVE a High Priest" who "IS a Minister" - not "We HAD a High Priest".


Heb 9
arnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. 11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

The ongoing work of Christ as our High Priest includes the individual interaction between ourselves and God as we submit to the Holy Spirit and accept the Gospel benefits of the Atoning Sacrifice that was completed once for all at the cross.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Winman]

You do have a point. 1 Corinthians 15:17 says if Jesus was not raised, then we are all in our sins.

1 Cor 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

The reason Jesus must have risen for our sins to be forgiven is that Jesus had to appear as our High Priest in heaven and sprinkle his blood on the mercy seat. Therefore, if he did not rise from the dead, our faith in him is vain, and we are still in our sins.

So, you are correct, the atonement must include the work of the High Priest.

 

[Inspector Javert]

It's way less complicated to refute Pink's deranged diatribe than all this:

All Icon did was quote the rantings of Pink. He's preposterously simple to defeat. The very First statement you bolded Bob is nonsense:

ALL the sins of ALL men were laid upon Christ, and the only sin which God now imputes to any is the refusal to receive His Son, then it inevitably follows that all the heathen who have lived since the crucifixion and have never heard of Christ, will certainly be saved.

That statement by Pink is simply stupid....whether they "refuse" out of obstinence or whether they "refuse" only because they've never heard is completely irrelevant. (Someone should explain that to Mr. Pink). That is true given either Arminianism OR Calvinism.

Pink thinks, however, that if the heathen only "refuse" because they haven't heard than somehow that negates the just punishment for the sin of omission of failing to believe....In what Universe, precisely, is he living in?

And, if "failure to hear" is relevant than what difference does it make whether it's either "Atoned for" or not? If mere failure to hear matters, than it makes no difference whether God simply decreed for his own purposes, or didn't. What does Atonement have to do with it?

Frankly, he's arguing like Charles Finney here.

The entire diatribe that Pink makes is based on the assumption that he as a mere man can tell God that it is "unjust" (in his fallen human reasoning) for any sin to be paid for twice...

That's the fallen human element of Calvinism wherein they scream to God that it's "NOT FAIR"...."NOT FAIR" if any given sin is atoned or paid for twice....Who are they to reply to God huh?

What if it IS darn well his pleasure that Christ pays the price and anyone who refuses to believe pays as well.....are they to put themselves in God's place and tell him what he can and can't do? Are they to reply to God that he's not being "fair"?

They do that all the time actually. It doesn't suit their fallen human reasoning or their sense of "fairness" that any sin might be paid for twice....so they decree to God (as though he weren't Sovereign) how he ought to adjudicate.

This false assumption is what Pink's entire diabolical treatise is based on. It's merely his assumption that he knows better than God what is fair or not.

 

[Iconoclast]

It does not appear that you understood Pinks article.

 

[Iconoclast]

BobRyan

The Calvinist definition for "Atonement" does not get to any of the work of Christ beyond the cross. But in the Bible the atonement includes the work of Christ as High Priest in Heb 8 and 9 - and to this very day Christ is our High Priest.

For you to make this statement indicates you do not understand the cal position.



in Christ,

Bob[/QUOTE]

 

[Iconoclast]

BobRyan

Leviticus 16 is where we find God's teaching on Atonement. In this case the "Day of Atonement".

It explains how it is that a universal atoning sacrifice "For Our sins and not for Our sins only but for the sins of the whole WORLD" 1 John 2:2 - does not result in universalism. Because the "Atoning Sacrifice" depicted as full and complete in Lev 16:15 when the "Sin offering" is slain - is not the laast work of Christ in Atonement.

Rather on the "Day of Atonement" both the work of Christ as "Sin Offering" AND his work as "High Priest" have to be accomplished.

Once this larger Bible scope for Atonement is completed - all issues are settled, all cases decided - no more "crossing over". It is the Rev 22:10-12 case where no one crosses over from lost to saved, or saved to lost.



The Day of Atonement in Lev 16 begins with what 1John 2:2 "The Atoning Sacrifice" -- the cross. There is no way to have the Atonement teaching of Lev 16 as a non-Cross subject.

But the Atonement includes more than the work of Christ on the Cross (as if He had not done anything gospel-significant since) rather it points to the work of Christ as High Priest - equally essential in the entire subject. And all of it as God's plan of salvation.

Arminianism would be universalism if we could ignore all the details after the cross (after the atoning sacrifice Lev 16:15) because Christ died for our sins and for the sins of the Whole World.

But in "atonement" the entire program is encompassed not only the sacrifice but also the individual case-by-case application of that atoning sacrifice - as Paul points out in Heb 9 regrading the work of Christ for each individual cleansing the conscience from sin.

However once that entire - larger scope of atonement is over - nothing is left - you are at Rev 22:10-11 "let him who is filthy be filthy still.... let him who is holy be holy still". And so the sanctuary in heaven shuts down as we see in Rev 15:8 and then comes the 7 last plagues (Rev 16) and 2nd coming. Because there is no more "crossing over" from lost to saved or from saved to lost.

All issues resolved, all cases settled.


in Christ,

B ob

[/QUOTE]
You need to be consistent in that The Eternal and unchangeable High Priest makes eternal intercession for the elect alone..ie, those who are sanctified.

10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

No general intercession here...Bob

 

[Protestant]

The entire diatribe that Pink makes is based on the assumption that he as a mere man can tell God that it is "unjust" (in his fallen human reasoning) for any sin to be paid for twice...

That's the fallen human element of Calvinism wherein they scream to God that it's "NOT FAIR"...."NOT FAIR" if any given sin is atoned or paid for twice....Who are they to reply to God huh?

What if it IS darn well his pleasure that Christ pays the price and anyone who refuses to believe pays as well.....are they to put themselves in God's place and tell him what he can and can't do? Are they to reply to God that he's not being "fair"?

They do that all the time actually. It doesn't suit their fallen human reasoning or their sense of "fairness" that any sin might be paid for twice....so they decree to God (as though he weren't Sovereign) how he ought to adjudicate.

This false assumption is what Pink's entire diabolical treatise is based on. It's merely his assumption that he knows better than God what is fair or not.

Peter Kreeft, Pope Francis and the entire Roman Catholic Curia are praising you for your deft defense of their holy faith.

They, too, understand a need for the double payment of sin debt.

The biblical doctrine of Christ's having fully propitiated the Father on behalf of the Elect is considered by them heretical, as it is also by you.

Thus, they have invented the blasphemous doctrine of Purgatory.

You, on the other hand, coyly dishonor Christ's finished work on the cross (as well as impugn God the Father's holiness and righteousness) by introducing the blasphemous doctrine of Double Jeopardy whereby Christ's work is insufficient to save anyone while God the Father has the right to require double payment because as Sovereign He can deny Himself anytime He feels like it.

 

[Inspector Javert]

It does not appear that you understood Pinks article.

For you to make this statement indicates you do not understand the cal position.

Here we go...might as well close the thread, Bob....since we all don't swallow the argument hook, line and sinker...obviously, we simply don't understand it as usual.

der.....which way did he go George, which way did he go?

 

[BobRyan]

You do have a point. 1 Corinthians 15:17 says if Jesus was not raised, then we are all in our sins.

1 Cor 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

The reason Jesus must have risen for our sins to be forgiven is that Jesus had to appear as our High Priest in heaven and sprinkle his blood on the mercy seat. Therefore, if he did not rise from the dead, our faith in him is vain, and we are still in our sins.

So, you are correct, the atonement must include the work of the High Priest.

And this is key to a non-Calvinist position. If you take the Calvinist definition for Atonement - you have almost no choice left but to be Calvinist.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by Iconoclast
pt2

12. If ALL the sins of ALL men were laid upon Christ, and the only sin which God now imputes to any is the refusal to receive His Son, then it inevitably follows that all the heathen who have lived since the crucifixion and have never heard of Christ, will certainly be saved. There is no other alternative possible. Not having heard of Christ, they cannot be charged with rejecting Him, and if all their other sins were atoned for (as we are asked to believe) then, necessarily, they must stand guiltless before God. But if this were true, then John 14:6 would be untrue, for there the recorded declaration of Christ is, "No man cometh unto the Father but by Me."t2

It's way less complicated to refute Pink's deranged diatribe than all this:

All Icon did was quote the rantings of Pink. He's preposterously simple to defeat. The very First statement you bolded Bob is nonsense:

It depends on how you define atonement and what is "left" after atonement is completed.

In Iconoclast's statement above - the presumption is that "payment made" is in the full sense of atonement in Lev 16. There is no more sin to be dealt with , no more repentance or anything to be required/needed/applied/considered. The deal is done.

If that can all be limited to the "sin offering" in Lev 16:15 (the cross) and if the cross is a payment for sin offering for all the world. Then all the world is saved. Universalism is the result.

That statement by Pink is simply stupid....whether they "refuse" out of obstinence or whether they "refuse" only because they've never heard is completely irrelevant. (Someone should explain that to Mr. Pink). That is true given either Arminianism OR Calvinism.

"To him that knows to do right and does it not - to him it is sin" James 4:17.

"If you were blind you would have no sin; but since you say 'we see' your sin remains" John 9:41

So the idea that the blood of Christ would cover sins of ignorance is not unthinkable.

And, if "failure to hear" is relevant than what difference does it make whether it's either "Atoned for" or not? If mere failure to hear matters, than it makes no difference whether God simply decreed for his own purposes, or didn't. What does Atonement have to do with it?

Atonement gets to the subject of forgiveness of sins and how it is accomplished - starting with the cross (the sin offering of Lev 16:15) and going through the entire High Priest process in the sanctuary (Christ in the heavenly sanctuary).

If it includes all sins of all mankind - as the cross does... and if all of it is brought into the sanctuary -- applied to each sinner through the individual work of Christ as our High Priest "cleansing the conscience from dead works" even before the sinner is born -- all done at the cross -- then you have universalism.

But if the individual work of Christ for each person - as High Priest is done on a case by case basis and the judgment of Dan 7 and of Romans 2 is applied the way the Bible states it - then "we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ to give an account for the deeds done in the body whether they be good or evil" 2Cor 5:10 and evil deeds (Rom 6:23) and bad fruit (Matt 7) have as their reward (Romans 2) the lake of fire.

And that refutes universalism even with the cross being "the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and not for our sins only but for the sins of the Whole World" 1John 2:2

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

You need to be consistent in that The Eternal and unchangeable High Priest makes eternal intercession for the elect alone..ie, those who are sanctified.

No doubt that even though the Cross provides an 'Atoning Sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1John 2:2 -- yet the individual work done by our High Priest in heaven is case-by-case and only the saints are fully atoned for as a result - as even Romans 2 points out "on the day when according to my Gospel God will judge" vs 16. It is a case-by-case process in the heavenly sanctuary.

10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

No general intercession here...

In heaven Christ is the "ONE Mediator between God and Man" 1Tim 2:5 so in that sense it is general.

But full atonement can only be completed for the saints as they are engaged in that "new covenant" work where God says "I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them"

And even C.H. Spurgeon admits to this work of God in the New Covenant regarding the Ten Commandments in his rendering of the "Baptist Confession of Faith".

I never argue that full atonement is completed in heaven for the one that refuses the Gospel.

The Atoning Sacrifice - at the cross is unlimited - it is for all. once for ALL. Undiscriminating

Completed Atonement of Christ as High Priest in heaven - is limited to only the saved because in that process "judgment is passed in favor of the saints" Dan 7:22 NASB) -- the good trees of Matt 7 are seen by their fruits to be good trees - as Romans 2:6-16 also affirms. So it as Romans 2:11 confirms "God is not partial" in that judgment process, the sifting and sorting that happens "at the judgment seat of Christ" as performs His work as High Priest.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Sadly for your view here - Lev 16 does not make any reference at all to "seated at the right hand of power when all is finished" - no reference to "posture" is emphasized in Lev 16 as having anything at all to do with "when the events of the Day of Atonement" are ended.

Rather the chapter of Lev 16 goes into great detail about the actual work done for accomplishing the "sin offering" and thus completed 'Atoning sacrifice" and ALSO the work of the High Priest that follows - in great detail.

Too late to start ignoring all the details in the chapter and looking for "then seated to indicate that the High Priest's ministry is ended".

In fact quite to the contrary - in the Bible the Priest-King is "SEATED" while doing His ministry.

So also in the book of Hebrews --

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Hebrews points to Christ as our High priest in heaven in both Heb 8 and 9 and He does his ministry - in heaven - seated at the right hand of the Father.

Heb 8
The New Priestly Service

8 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man.
3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer. 4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law; 5 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. For He said, “See that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” 6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.


Heb 4
14 Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

"We HAVE a High Priest" who "IS a Minister" - not "We HAD a High Priest".


Heb 9
arnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. 11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

[FONT=&quot]Zech 6[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]11[/FONT][FONT=&quot]"Take silver and gold, make an ornate crown and set it on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] 12"Then say to him, 'Thus says the LORD of hosts, "Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the LORD. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] 13"Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the LORD, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne Thus, He will be a PRIEST on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices."' [/FONT]


Heb 8
We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle

You may be surprised to learn that the High Priest had ministries other than what is described in Leviticus 16!

Heb 7:27 the High Priest's work included the daily sacrifice and offerings as well as the Day of Atonement work. This is key to my statement.

Christ is our High Priest providing the benefits of the ONE sacrifice for sin (all sacrificial types collapse into the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross) and His work includes both the daily and the year ending "final" work that is done on the Day of Atonement in Lev 16 after all daily services completed all sins repented off - all sacrificial blood claimed individually.

And so when Christ went to heaven as our High Priest He began His work with the daily portion of that ministry - and then when He moves into the final phase (as Daniel 7 points out) the books are opened the court sits and ultimately "judgment is passed in favor of the saints" at which point even Daniel 7 declares that we have the 2nd coming.

What happened in Leviticus 16 ocurred but ONCE a year

True. I am not sure if you are intentionally trying to make my point for me - or not.

while he ministered 364 other days of the year and the ministry 364 days of the year was not the ministry of Leviticus 16.

True. I am not sure if you are intentionally trying to make my point for me - or not.

Leviticus 16 ministry has been FINISHED "ONCE AND FOR ALL" (Heb. 10:9-14)

The only thing that Heb 10 says is "finished once for all" is the sacrifice.

Were you not paying attention??

and that is the point of the writers of Hebrews. What he is now doing "seated" is not the Leviticus 16 ministry but the 364 days

Backwards my friend. In God's model the Day of Atonement service is not first and then comes the daily... rather the daily is first and then comes the Day of Atonement.

As it turns out - Bible details matter.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

The SDA "investigative judgment" doctrine is false and has no Biblical basis at all. Indeed, it is a complete denial of the finished work of Christ..

Rather than ranting about a denomination and terms like "investigative Judgment" let's just stick with the Bible texts being raised here for discussion.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[The Biblicist]

And so when Christ went to heaven as our High Priest He began His work with the daily portion of that ministry - and then when He moves into the final phase (as Daniel 7 points out) the books are opened the court sits and ultimately "judgment is passed in favor of the saints" at which point even Daniel 7 declares that we have the 2nd coming.

Absurd! The Hebrew text in Daniel 8 does not support your SDA doctrine and nether does Levitidus 16 or Hebrews 7-10 support your SDA false doctrine.

The daily work of the High Priest was grounded upon the day of Atonement. The day of atonement symbolized the ONCE FOR ALL atoning work on the cross by Christ whereas the daily work symbolizes application of that finished work on a daily basis.

Hebrews 10:9-17 deals with the day of Atonement and the "once for all" finished work of Christ on Calvary. This is why he is "seated" as the Great High Preist in heaven because Leviticus 16 is FINISHED COMPLETELY in regard to HIS WORK of redemption. It is faith in His FINISHED WORK that is the basis, and only true basis for justification. HIS WORK is finished in regard to HIS OWN PERSON as our High Preist. What is not finished, and cannot be finished until the last elect is saved is application of that work. However, it is the FINISHED WORK that GUANTEES the application will be finished and that is precisely why the gospel promises ETERNAL LIFE NOW and no future condemnation to all those given to him by the Father.

 

[The Biblicist]

Rather than ranting about a denomination and terms like "investigative Judgment" let's just stick with the Bible texts being raised here for discussion.

in Christ,

Bob

A pig by any other name is still a pig! You are trying to pass off a pig for a sheep and it is still a pig. When you base your doctrine on Daniel 8 then we are talking about the same pig.

 

[Yeshua1]

It's way less complicated to refute Pink's deranged diatribe than all this:

All Icon did was quote the rantings of Pink. He's preposterously simple to defeat. The very First statement you bolded Bob is nonsense:

ALL the sins of ALL men were laid upon Christ, and the only sin which God now imputes to any is the refusal to receive His Son, then it inevitably follows that all the heathen who have lived since the crucifixion and have never heard of Christ, will certainly be saved.

That statement by Pink is simply stupid....whether they "refuse" out of obstinence or whether they "refuse" only because they've never heard is completely irrelevant. (Someone should explain that to Mr. Pink). That is true given either Arminianism OR Calvinism.

Pink thinks, however, that if the heathen only "refuse" because they haven't heard than somehow that negates the just punishment for the sin of omission of failing to believe....In what Universe, precisely, is he living in?

And, if "failure to hear" is relevant than what difference does it make whether it's either "Atoned for" or not? If mere failure to hear matters, than it makes no difference whether God simply decreed for his own purposes, or didn't. What does Atonement have to do with it?

Frankly, he's arguing like Charles Finney here.

The entire diatribe that Pink makes is based on the assumption that he as a mere man can tell God that it is "unjust" (in his fallen human reasoning) for any sin to be paid for twice...

That's the fallen human element of Calvinism wherein they scream to God that it's "NOT FAIR"...."NOT FAIR" if any given sin is atoned or paid for twice....Who are they to reply to God huh?

What if it IS darn well his pleasure that Christ pays the price and anyone who refuses to believe pays as well.....are they to put themselves in God's place and tell him what he can and can't do? Are they to reply to God that he's not being "fair"?

They do that all the time actually. It doesn't suit their fallen human reasoning or their sense of "fairness" that any sin might be paid for twice....so they decree to God (as though he weren't Sovereign) how he ought to adjudicate.

This false assumption is what Pink's entire diabolical treatise is based on. It's merely his assumption that he knows better than God what is fair or not.

either God intended to have a definite number of sinners saved/atoned for by the death of Jesus on the Cross, had a syre salvation paid for by ransom to God, or else God did intend to have all sinners get saved by Jesus act, but he failed to get that accomplished!

You can say Jesus death was for all, Gosd Will that none ever perish, yet have God unable to accomplish His desired goal?

 

[Yeshua1]

[/I]



It depends on how you define atonement and what is "left" after atonement is completed.

In Iconoclast's statement above - the presumption is that "payment made" is in the full sense of atonement in Lev 16. There is no more sin to be dealt with , no more repentance or anything to be required/needed/applied/considered. The deal is done.

If that can all be limited to the "sin offering" in Lev 16:15 (the cross) and if the cross is a payment for sin offering for all the world. Then all the world is saved. Universalism is the result.




"To him that knows to do right and does it not - to him it is sin" James 4:17.

"If you were blind you would have no sin; but since you say 'we see' your sin remains" John 9:41

So the idea that the blood of Christ would cover sins of ignorance is not unthinkable.




Atonement gets to the subject of forgiveness of sins and how it is accomplished - starting with the cross (the sin offering of Lev 16:15) and going through the entire High Priest process in the sanctuary (Christ in the heavenly sanctuary).

If it includes all sins of all mankind - as the cross does... and if all of it is brought into the sanctuary -- applied to each sinner through the individual work of Christ as our High Priest "cleansing the conscience from dead works" even before the sinner is born -- all done at the cross -- then you have universalism.

But if the individual work of Christ for each person - as High Priest is done on a case by case basis and the judgment of Dan 7 and of Romans 2 is applied the way the Bible states it - then "we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ to give an account for the deeds done in the body whether they be good or evil" 2Cor 5:10 and evil deeds (Rom 6:23) and bad fruit (Matt 7) have as their reward (Romans 2) the lake of fire.

And that refutes universalism even with the cross being "the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and not for our sins only but for the sins of the Whole World" 1John 2:2

in Christ,

Bob

NO christian EVER has to face an "investigative judgemnent" after death to see if they have kept salvation, as they ONLY are before the Lord to have their works judged, NOT if keeping eternal life!

 

[The Biblicist]

NO christian EVER has to face an "investigative judgemnent" after death to see if they have kept salvation, as they ONLY are before the Lord to have their works judged, NOT if keeping eternal life!

Bob does not want his false prophetess and the demonination which is directed and led by the spirit of false prophets to be exposed for what it is.

Strong deception for sure (2 Thes. 2:9-12) but the fact is that we NOW HAVE ETERNAL LIFE (Jn. 5:24a) and shall not come into judgement but are ALREADY PASSED from death to life (Jn. 5:24b) so what is born of the Spirit NEVER DIES (Jn. 11:26).

SDA have a cultic interpretation of the nature of man and so they cannot understand salvation because they can't understand that man is not merely blood, breath and life but possesses the same kind of ETERNAL "soul" and "spirit" that charcterizes God. They don't understand that "death" and "life" are TWO DIFFERENT FORMS OF EXISTENCE and that neither has anything to do with cessation of existence or annihilation. They reject the true image of God and make man like beasts with nothing more than biological life consisting of breath, blood and a physical life.

 

[Yeshua1]

No doubt that even though the Cross provides an 'Atoning Sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1John 2:2 -- yet the individual work done by our High Priest in heaven is case-by-case and only the saints are fully atoned for as a result - as even Romans 2 points out "on the day when according to my Gospel God will judge" vs 16. It is a case-by-case process in the heavenly sanctuary.

In heaven Christ is the "ONE Mediator between God and Man" 1Tim 2:5 so in that sense it is general.

But full atonement can only be completed for the saints as they are engaged in that "new covenant" work where God says "I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them"

And even C.H. Spurgeon admits to this work of God in the New Covenant regarding the Ten Commandments in his rendering of the "Baptist Confession of Faith".

I never argue that full atonement is completed in heaven for the one that refuses the Gospel.

The Atoning Sacrifice - at the cross is unlimited - it is for all. once for ALL. Undiscriminating

Completed Atonement of Christ as High Priest in heaven - is limited to only the saved because in that process "judgment is passed in favor of the saints" Dan 7:22 NASB) -- the good trees of Matt 7 are seen by their fruits to be good trees - as Romans 2:6-16 also affirms. So it as Romans 2:11 confirms "God is not partial" in that judgment process, the sifting and sorting that happens "at the judgment seat of Christ" as performs His work as High Priest.

in Christ,

Bob

I am RIGHT NOW fully Justified before God, ALL sins have been atoned for by the Cross, and there will be NO SINS that I will ever commit that the blodd of jesus had not fully paid/satisifed beforeGod...

ALL my works and deeds done since saved will be judged and weighed by Him, BUT NOT my sins, to see if kept saved or lost, that was FULLY done at the Cross!