I John 2:2

Ray,
Good to see we have the same book.

 

I have shown the clear teaching of 1John 2 and have shown conclusively that simply plugging in "elect Jews" into the book of 1John (as you seem to "need" to do in 1John 2:2) does not work.

You do not actually respond to the points raised - or solve the problems this has created for your view so I don't see how your position can progress in this dialoge.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Yes - as the NIV does.

As for Atonement - it is the entire process God outlines in Lev 16 - (His chapter on the subject).

It begins with the Atoning Sacrifice as Lev 16 points out - but it comes in the context of the entire year of sacrifices where individuals have confessed and repented of sin and have been forgiven.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Thanks Bob ...

Now that leads to my question. Was the atoning sacrifice in the OT limited or unlimited? Was it for Israel AND the Philistines AND the Canaanites AND the Assyrians AND the Egyptians AND the Moabites, etc. Or was the atoning sacrifice for Israel? If I recall correctly, when the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies he wore an ephod. And on that ephod were 12 jewels, representing the tribes of ISRAEL. Noticeably missing from that ephod were jewels representing the rest of the nations.

Incidentally, I think you're incorrect when you say that hilasmos means "atoning sacrifice." It is clear both biblically and in secular Greek that the term meant "a price paid to mollify the wrath of another."

Now it took an atoning sacrifice to propitiate the Father. But to propitiate the Father is not the same thing as to atone for men.

One more thing. 1 John 2:2 says nothing about Jesus being a potential propitiation. It doesn't say that He is the potential propitiation for the sins of the world. It says He has propitiated the Father for the sins of the world. Now according to your understanding of the word "world," that would have to mean that the wrath of the Father upon every single individual who ever has lived or will live has already been poured out in its entirity in Jesus Christ.

Now here is the problem. You have God pouring out wrath that He does not have. You claim that His infinite wrath against all sin was poured out in Jesus Christ in the cross. Then you turn around and affirm that even though the fullness of His wrath was poured out in Christ, He then turns around and finds some more wrath somewhere in reserve to pour out again in the reprobate. So you have added an idea in the text that is not there. You've added the idea of a potential propitiation. That is not what this text says. It says the Father has been propitiated.

That leaves 3 options ...

1) We can't believe what John wrote ... He might be wrong ... I reject that view.

2) Jesus has propitiated the Father for every single human, and therefore, every single human will be exempt from wrath in hell, and brought safely into the presence of the Father in heaven ... I reject that view.

3) You've misunderstood John's use of the word "world."

There are no other options ... if you'll be honest with the text.

 

NO my friend, there is no PARALLEL between the two scriptures.

This is John teaching Christians who have been threatened by "FALSE TEACHING", How to live the Christian life, and what to hold fast to. It is in a section of his teachings that I would label "walk in the light"

The first John example is a Friend of God speaking from God's Perspective while the John 11 example is the "enemies" of God speaking from their limited perspective. The word "World" used in both examples is the same word. but the speakers of the word a universe apart in perspective. "John, God's friend, vs those enemies of God the Son, the Pharisees". So my friend, you have not drawn an accurate parallel between the two passages as you claim. Context is everything!

 

The Passover was for everyone and the atoning sacrifice is for everyone it is the day on which God "judges the world" according to Hebrew tradition.

However - I will grant you that the atonement PROCESS was completed only for the saints WITHIN. This means that not only the daily sacrifice - but the Passover as well - had been completed first AND THEN the Atonment is made at the end of the year.

But in Christ's case all of that happens in one sacrifice at the cross.

But then we see the Heb 8-10 work of Christ in heaven as High Priest happen AFTER the cross.

The PROCESS must be complete for atonement to be complete. But the atoning SACRIFICE is completed at the cross. That part is done.

In the OT - each person brought their lamb and then sacrificed it. "OBviously" Christ does not "wait to be sacrificed" as each persom comes to Him.

In the end we all agree that the saints go to heaven - and atonement is completed for them.

Where we differ is that you claim that the atoning SACRIFICE was ALSO only for the FEW and not for THE WORLD.

And in that - you are wrong.

If I recall correctly, when the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies he wore an ephod. And on that ephod were 12 jewels, representing the tribes of ISRAEL. Noticeably missing from that ephod were jewels representing the rest of the nations.

It is not clear that "biblically" John would be using a pagan concept to explain atonement.

Rather - the CONTEXT would be that John would USE the scriptures of his readers as the basis for Gospel doctrine as we see in Eph 6:1-2 and in Heb 3 and 4.

So Atoning Sacrifice IS the right translation as the NIV has it.

Wrong. JEsus said "The FAther HIMSELF loves you"

Never in all of scripture do we find the pagan concept of God who wished to kill you being "appeased" by Christ who loves you and wishes to save you.

That entire notion is pagan - not Biblical.

In the Bible GOD SO LOVED that HE GAVE...

See?

In Christ,

Bob

 

Those who argue that the Passover and the Atoning Sacrifice of Leviticus are not for the lost - miss the point that Israel included BOTH the saved AND the lost and that judgement upon the lost was part of the message of Lev 16.

On this we agree.

It does not say "potential propitiation"

It says "HE IS The Atoning Sacrifice FOR OUR sins and NOT for our sins ONLY but for the SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD".

It is also "very clear" that finding this language in Leviticus about the Passover OR about the atoning sacrifice of Lev 11 would have prevented you from arguing in Lev that the Atonement did not include a sacrifice "For the WHOLE WOLRD".

The fact that you find a way to ignore this scope in 1John 2 - might mean you would be ignoring it in Lev 16 as well - but I think it would be "harder to do".

No John never says that. John is the one who STARTS the process by saying "The Father SO LOVED that HE GAVE" -- John 3:16.

This concept is totally opposed to the more pagan concept of "God wanted to kill BUT CHRIST Propitiated".

Howevr - this contrast will serve to point out the difference between Calvinism and the text.

Wrath against SIN - not against people. The measure of the debt of ALL the sins of all the people who have ever lived - is the measure of the sacrifice given at Calvary!!

That is the meaning of "NOT for our sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD".

That is merely so much word-games for Calvinism. The point remains that God's Law demands a debt for EACH sin for EACH person in the "WHOLE WORLD".

That certificate of debt is paid having nailed it to the cross "paid in full". Each sinner may claim that full payment or may reject it. Those who reject the payment are subject to paying their OWN debt IN FULL. God having provided the full payment has the right to set the conditions upon which it is given "TO as MANY as RECEVIED Him to THEM He gave the right to be called the children of God". That "whosoever BELIEVES on HIM should not perish but have ever lasting life".

These are the conditions of RECEIVING that payment in full that John defined. So YES John argues the payment is for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD (1John 2) and even claims that God sent His Son "To be the savior of the WORLD" 1John 4. and Christ said that the life He gives is "For the World" John 6.

No - you have subtracted from the term "WHOLE WORLD" the "Many" of Matt 7 that do not go to heaven and left in only the "FEW" of Matt 7.

The mistake is yours.

In Christ,

Bob

 

True enough. I argue that going through 1John 1 and 2 and replacing "OUR" and "US" with "Saved Jews" or "elect Jews" (as Calvinism so desperately 'needs' to do in 1John 2:2) and then replacing "WORLD" with "Elect Jews and Elect Gentiles only" as Calvinism needs - shows just how "valid" that substitution really is IN CONTEXT of the chapter.

Do you have any evidence at all that in his latter days John only wrote to "elect Jews"???

I doubt it.

John is the one that records Christ as saying "OTHER sheep I have who are NOT of this fold".

The book of Hebrews is the only one in the entire NT where the case could "arguably" be made that the author specifically addressed the Jews WITHIN Christianity - and not the entire Christian church.

Then we do agree - that is not workable.

See? We agree on something!!

And so -- we agree "again".

He is the atoning sacrifice for "OUR SINS" (all Christians) and NOT four OUR SINS only but for those of the WHOLE WORLD.

There is the true menaing.

True enough. But as we see in Acts 15 the judgment of James was in NO way "limited" to just Jewish Christians. His directive went out to the ENTIRE Christian church.

However it can not be argued that Paul made the same statement about John being the "apostles to the Gentils" or that Thomas was "the apostle to the Gentiles" -- in fact we know that a number of the Apostles ministered to BOTH Jew and Gentile - without question!

Even Paul considered Gentiles to be part of "ALL ISRAEL" as we see in Romans 11. Paul argues "They are NOT ALL Israel who are descended from Abraham".

This truth was established early in the NT and the Apostles did not rebel against it.

Indeed - without any evidence at all of that being the case - the statement is made "none-the-less"

You never did go through 1John (or even chapters 1 and 2 of 1John) and show that "US" and "OUR" are constrained to just "the elect Jews" as you "needed" it be constrained in 1John 2:2.

You simply show that you needed it - but not that it works.

Go through the first two chapters and show that it works.

Your claim above that it only works as "the whole Christian Church" is my point exactly.

In Christ,

Bob

 

What is it you think 1 john 2:2 is saying?

Seems to me it clearly states that Jesus is the Expiation, Sacrifice, Propitiation for Sin, not for sinners! But not just the sins of the locals, but the sins throughout the whole world.

 

Because Southern, it is not sins that send a person to hell! Jesus paid that penalty for us! He died to atone for sins thus removing the penalty of sins from us!

It is instead LACK OF FAITH IN GOD the FATHER, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit that causes a person to be cast into the lake of fire, the second, or spirit death! John 3:17 makes it clear what Jesus did for us.

God first established that the penalty for sinning is death! But somewhere along the human timeline, God repented and instead gave us His son as a Once for ALL atonement by which the penalty for ALL the sins of the world are PAID IN FULL!

That which is paid in full cannot be charged against us, leaving us in the position of being able to have everlasting life through believing in Jesus, just as Jesus told us in John 3:16.

NO MAN GOES TO HELL FOR SINNING! ONLY FOR NOT BELIEVING IN JESUS.

 

But they are not my problems, they are yours!

All sins save that of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit are forgivable for the one who confesses them to God. BUT! the question remains do sins send you to hell? The answer is NO, because Jesus paid the penalty for sin ONCE, for ALL sins. Therefore, the Judgment of God is one based in its entirety upon the faith condition of the individual person! That is one reason why Jesus told us we are not to judge any man!

UNBELIEF is the OPPOSITE of BELIEF. Belief is the first and continuing stage of FAITH. If belief grows into faith, what does unbelief grow into?

NO! If something or someone is Evil that does not mean it is sin. Satan is evil, that does not mean that Satan is sin. Every sin is a deed, a work of unrighteousness! All deeds will be tested (Revelation 20:14) Those that are evil deeds (sin) will be consumed by fire as if they are wood, hay and stubble leaving only worthless ashes. The one who did those deeds is spared for the final judgment which is based entirely on whether or not one's name is written in the Book of Life.

Yes! it is sin to disobey God. That is what Adam and Eve did that caused the whole of the problem that Jesus came to rectify.

For one thing, neither you nor I can make God a liar! So how can it be a sin if it cannot be done?

Then you do not understand the ATONEMENT!

Unbelief is the ONLY SIN for which man is cast into the lake of fire. Revelation 20:14,15. These "identifications of type" are examples of those who lack belief in God, therefore they get cast into the lake of fire because their names are not found in the Book of Life.

All those "things" are Identified so that we mere mortals will know how to recognize what we do that is sin so that we can confess our sins, and receive forgiveness for our sins and get cleansed from ALL unrighteousness.

Spurgeon failed to recognize the truth of the what belief and unbelief truly are, and where they reside in man. You would be wise to put less faith in Spurgeon, and trust the scriptures.

 

Conclusion: If it "is" a sin to disobey God, then when He commands us to "believe", how do we disobey this command?... By not believing! which "is" unbelief!That makes unbelief a sin because unbelief is disobedience to the command to believe.

In Christ </font>[/QUOTE]No sir, THE SIN IS DISOBEDIENCE, NOT UNBELIEF.

God also commands us to Love one another. If we fail to love one another, the sin is disobedience not failure to love.