"For God SO LOVES the HUMAN RACE..."

JonC,

I am suggesting you do not interact with me or my posts

No.it does not...it never says THE SINS OF ALL MEN

.

Again, I never used this language. I do not need a spokesman the misquotes my words
I am asking once again, stop doing this

Whatever...

I never said this once again. I do not want you as a spokesman

Your opinion, I do not share it.

 

"JonC

Glad you agree
I will leave it here,

2 and he -- he is a propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world,

"The sins of" is not in there.

 

never says the sins of all men

 

Not so....it is speaking of the sins of believers whose sins were propitiated. ...
and not for ours only...but the whole world....
That is any remaining believer who God will draw to himself worldwide...not for the ungodly, who remain dead in Adam...their sins are not propitiated, God's wrath still abides on them.

So the sin, is only that of those who believe.even though they are scattered worldwide.

 

JonC,

see post 109...

καὶ αὐτὸς ἱλασμός ἐστινπερὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, οὐπερὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων δὲ μόνονἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ ὅλου τοῦκόσμου.

He turns away the wrath that abides upon those among mankind who are being saved. I do not think you understand propitiation as it relates to the gospel as Paul explained it:
romans3;
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

Yes I do. However it looks like you might have missed those lectures in school.
Here as Paul explains the heart of the gospel the word is used of those who have
1]faith in his blood

2]those who have been justified freely

3]he is the just and the justifier of Him WHO BELIEVES in Jesus....

not "all men" as you post.

from preceptaustin;
Is (estin) is in the present tense signifying that Jesus is continually the propitiation. This is good news for sinners such as myself who are daily in need of an Advocate Who is qualified. Indeed, He sits in His glorified body even now at the right hand of the Father and not only pleads for mercy for us but also intercedes for us. (Ro 8:34, Heb 7:25) O, what a Savior, what a Lord!

2434) (hilasmos akin to hileōs = merciful, propitious) in the NT (only here and 1Jn 4:10) refers to a sacrifice that turns away the wrath of God and thereby makes God propitious (favorably inclined or disposed, disposed to be gracious and/or merciful, ready to forgive) toward us.

I know exactly what the word means, and have no need for you to suggest i do not know what it means. To suggest it was for all men is error plain and simple..

 

John MacArthur links hilasmos with the mercy seat in the Old Covenant...

The term propitiation, in definition and application, is most notably a biblical and theological word. It is a translation of hilasmos, which means “appeasement,” or “satisfaction.” Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross satisfied the demands of God’s justice, thus appeasing His holy wrath against believers’ sins. Several related words provide additional understanding of the nature of propitiation. The verb hilaskomai, “to make satisfaction for,” occurs in Luke 18:13 and Hebrews 2:17. Hilasterion refers to the sacrifice of atonement required to placate God’s wrath (cf. Rom. 3:25). The translators of the Septuagint (Lxx) used this term (hilasterion) to designate the mercy seat, which establishes propitiation’s link to the Old Testament sacrificial system (Read Ex 25:10-22, esp Ex 25:17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22)

The mercy seat was the lid or cover of the ark, situated between the divine Shekinah glory cloud above the ark and law tablets inside the ark. Because the priests sprinkled the seat with blood from the (animal) sacrifices (Ed: See the inefficacy of animal blood in Heb 10:4, Heb 10:11), it was the place at which atonement for sin occurred. The sprinkled blood thus stood between God (the Shekinah) and His broken law (the tablets). The sacrificial blood of animals never did placate God (cf. Heb. 7:26-28; 9:6-15; 10:1-18), but it pictured the future sacrifice of Christ that would fully satisfy the Father (Heb. 9:23-28; cf. Isa. 53:6, 10; Matt. 20:28; Eph. 5:2). If the Old Testament sacrificial system had appeased God’s wrath once and for all, the Jews would not have continued endlessly to bring burnt offerings (Lev. 1:3-17; 6:8-13), sin offerings (Lev. 4:1-5:13; 6:24-30), and trespass offerings (Lev. 5:14-6:7; 7:1-10) over the centuries. (NT Commentary on 1, 2, 3 John & Jude)precept austin;

 

But this still leaves an atonement gutted of its ability to pay for sin. In fact, it ignores it completely and makes calling without justification the means of salvation.

 

Logically, according to universalist, Christ's death had nothing to do with sin or all would be saved.

 

According to the logic of "Evangelical" universalism, Christ did not pay for the least sin or all would be saved. Which BTW is what hard core universalists claim.

 

Words are defined by their biblical usage.
When the Holy Spirit uses them in a clear way in scripture,that trumps any secular idea.
My theology is just fine as I could have added a dozen more theologians to the examples I offered who share the view I put forth.
You seem to read dark motives into my posts.
That these truths elude you is something for you to work on.
Perhaps if you read some commentaries, and word study books it might remove obstacles that have blocked your path.
Others agree with my posts. Again I do not think you are able to follow the train of thought here.
Perhaps someone else can help you sort this out.
Read over Biblicists posts again, as he offered post after post of helpful verses. Write out, or print out his posts and list each verse and it will have a positive influence .
I have offered what I can ,but at this time you do not welcome these truths.
No Calvinist that I know of expresses the ideas you offer. You evidently are a "calvinist" of a "different kind liking almost every anti Calvinist post offered.
Maybe another like minded person will come forward and help you. I do not know of any who view you as a Calvinist at all. That is not here not there however. I am just trying to solve this puzzle.
Thanks for your responses on this matter.

 

Wait a minute, was there not a whole thread a while back where you were arguing against Substitutionary Atonement?