General Reconciliation

[Van]

Looking at it objectively

How does this retract from the truth of the principle that the blood of the Lamb was SELECTIVELY and PARTICULARLY applied ONLY to those whose names were written from the foundation of the world in the Lamb's book of Life, long before they even heard the Name of Christ, or the gospel, or "accepted" Christ
?
The FACT is that the Bible teaches names were written in a book in ETERNITY PAST and for those whose names are not in that book, there is no atonement, no adoption, and no redemption.

And if the language is difficult, then on what basis do you accept the NASB's rendering ?

1) I indicated (perhaps poorly) the Greek grammar is difficult, and so two variations are found in translations, the one I accept, and the one used to support the notion that Christ was slain from the foundation of the world.

Here is the NET footnote on the issue:

The prepositional phrase “since the foundation of the world” is traditionally translated as a modifier of the immediately preceding phrase in the Greek text, “the Lamb who was killed” (so also G. B. Caird, Revelation [HNTC], 168), but it is more likely that the phrase “since the foundation of the world” modifies the verb “written” (as translated above). Confirmation of this can be found in Rev 17:8 where the phrase “written in the book of life since the foundation of the world” occurs with no ambiguity.

2) No, scripture teaches the opposite, that names were not written and so by inference also written, from the foundation of the world. The time span would then start during the creation week and extend until the end of time, because the whole span is from or since or after creation.

3) According to Calvinism, individuals were chosen before the foundation of the world (in Eternity past) but Revelation 13:7 teaches the names were only entered after creation. Thus the verse (Rev. 13:7) indicates a time of selection after rather than before creation.

 

[Van]

So Sorryh

well, didn't you just admit that Scripture teaches God wrote names in His book of life FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD ?

And the same Scriptures teaches that God sends to the lake of fire those whose names were not found in the book ? Therefore the blood of Christ does not COVER THE WHOLE WORLD ?

so, whose doctrine is now bogus.
Those of the Doctrine of Grace, or those of the doctrine of disgrace such as yours ?

In my view, it is Calvinism that is "bogus." From the foundation does not mean during creation or before creation, but rather any time after the foundation of the world.

Scripture teaches Christ paid the ransom for all, and became the propitiation for the whole world. When any individual is placed in Christ, their sin burden is removed (the circumcision of Christ) and since the individual had be of the world (fallen human) that removal "takes away the sin (singular) of the world.

Calvinism is a doctrine of disgrace, thanks for the apt descriptor.

 

[pinoybaptist]

In my view, it is Calvinism that is "bogus." From the foundation does not mean during creation or before creation, but rather any time after the foundation of the world.

balderdash, pure and simple. and on what do you base that ? YOUR wisdom, YOUR view ?
But no matter when, THE FACT STAYS.
Names were written FROM the foundation of the world, which means waaaaaayyy before any of those persons or souls bearing those names came into existence, and THE FACT stays, those names were not written IN RESPONSE to any action of those persons, but despite them.
And the FACT STAYS, the redemptive sacrifice of Christ, and His shed blood, was for those who owned those names.
they are the ALL, they are the ones PLACED IN CHRIST FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.

Calvinism is a doctrine of disgrace, thanks for the apt descriptor.

The poo stays in your camp.