Is this what Limited Atonement means?

Hi RLVaughn;

If he hadn't then the unbeliever would have an excuse at Judgement. He could say I couldn't help my self because God wouldn't allow me a choice. He didn't die for my sins so that I might have that choice.
May Christ Shione His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

Nope ... my view has nothing to do with it. You were shown clear passages where "all" is limited to less than "all."

As I said, you need to read the context.
John 12:20-21 20 Now there were some Greeks among those who were going up to worship at the feast; 21 these then came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida of Galilee, and began to ask him, saying, "Sir, we wish to see Jesus."

That shows very clearly who is being talked about. Strangely enough, it is exactly what I said .. This passage is about Jews and Greeks.

Strangely enough, this passage is not about Lazarus in the least. It is about Greeks seeing Jesus. The ones who belived because of Lazarus were Jews, as the context tells us (vv, 9-10, 17).

I never said any such thing. I am trying to say that the reference is to men without distinction. That is what the verse teaches. Read MOrris's commentary on this verse. It will help you out.

I don't have any more ability than anyone else. I never claimed anything differently. This is not about pride. You are going on a personal attack in order to keep from dealing with what the text says. Just read the context of Scripture and believe it.

I didn't question the word "all" at all. I never questioned it. I believe it.

It isn't limiting it. It is explaining what it refers to.

Read vv. 16-21. It is about the authority of the word. It is not the invention of man, such as the clever fables. It is the result of the HOly Spirit working through men.

Based on the fact that you missed the point of 2 PEter 1:16-21, it is clear that you do not know what you are talking about. You consistently make up the position that you disagree with. You consistently misrepresent Scirpture on these issues. And then you resort to attacking me and calling me names. REad the Scripture; believe it. Don't make it up.

 

Hi Larry;

I have not attacked you Larry, that is not true.
I just don't believe your views.
In this statement;
"It seems your tripping over your own pride here. Pride of a traning that is failing even you."
This is not an attack but an explanantion of how what you say seems to me. You use the same terminology to say the same kind of thing. Are you saying that when you say things this way it is really a personal attack. Because you have said simular things to me as well.

It would seem that way larry when you take it out of context. Context is the whole passage. You know it is. You just used a "mention" and then claimed it to be the subject at hand. The Greeks and Jews are not the subject the subject is the conviction that had come over the Jews and Greeks because of the resurrection of Lazrus. The Greeks seeking Christ there already believed.

First this is what you claimed about the passage 2 Peter 1,"2 Peter 1 talks of paying attention to the lamp that shines in a dark place." Of course we can say the Whole Bible is light and we would be right.

The only name I have called you is "Larry" and there has been no such attack. I will not back away from what I hold as truth. I will not deny the clear teaching of scripture. Which you have also accused me of.
It is my belief that you need to listen to that convicting Spirit with in. Not that I have told you this because I'm no body important, but I know He is speaking to your heart and is convicting you. I hope the Best for you Larry That's all I have to say on this thread.
It's your choice Larry. Choose wisely.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

No, you attacked me personally rather than discussing the issues. That is fine ... but it is what you did. It didn't cross the line for which you would have been edited. But when you start bringing statements about pride into it, you are making a personal attack. Just don't do that ... especially when it isn't true.

And that is what I cited. The verses I cited are the beginning of the paragraph and set the context for the text in view.

The Bible doesn't say that. The Jews were at the raising of Lazarus. "Now there were" begins a new paragraph, a different subject.

Really??? And how do you know that? The Bible doesn't say it.

Which is what I said, and you said I was wrong. Go figure ...

And for good reason ... because you have.

I have. That is why I rejected the view you hold. I used to hold it, but when I began to study the Scripture, I could no longer hold it. It simply wasn't what Scripture was teaching.

I already did.

It is still in his word whenever you will believe it. You don't have to agree on the specifics of limited atonement. But you shouldn'd deny the explicitly clear things that you have denied in many places.

 

His death provided a way to salvation for every human who ever existed.

Why do you say that it is in vain?

Because of the rules that God created from the beginning. Man's rejection of God causes them to go to Hell, because his sins have not been covered by the blood of God. These are God's rules as shown in His Word.

You're operating under a false paradigm here. His blood is all that is sufficient for a person to be saved. The application of that sufficient sacrifice is the "Jesus is Lord" that a person must say to be saved, proverbially speaking. Put it this way, even in the Calvinist standpoint, a person is not saved until he is regenerated - what, is the death itself not sufficient enough? Of course, a Calvinist would say it is sufficient, even though that death is not applied until the person gets saved.

Why is it in vain? Just because you say it is? I don't think you're thinking big enough.

To provide salvation for all who choose to come.

His rejection of the free gift. If Christ had not died for Hitler, then there would not have been a free gift that was available to him.

 

ILUVLIGHT, I don't want to write too much on this, because it probably gets away from Nate's original intent. But to say that Jesus died for whosover would not believe seems to go directly against John 3:16, which says God gave His Son for whosoever believeth to have everlasting life. Whosoever believeth not is the opposite of whosoever believeth.

 

Hi RLVaughn;

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
What I said was;

What your misunderstanding is that God Loved The world of sinners and died for them while still in there sins, so that whosoever believes in Him could be saved. The whosoever implies any sinner that changes there minds so that they could be saved. Changing your mind is called repentance. Cutting the verse in half leaves off half the meaning with out which, you only have a half truth.
Can we honestly cut a verse in half?, having half a thought and then claim we know, what that half, trully means. I don't think so.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

Hi Nate;
I hope you did get the answers you were looking for.

I see what you mean. Very few Calvinist it seems have ever read the "Insititues of Christianity" by Calvin. I have read a few post where Calvinist absolutely refuse to believe that Calvin actually said and believed what he did. Now when I'm told I don't understand Calvinism. I know they actually mean what they believe Calvinism is. What some say it is, isn't what it trully was meant to be.
A good example of the changes is that they once believed that there children inherited election.

I have to say that you had some very good questions. Got any more?
May Christ Shine His light On Us All;
Mike

 

Hi, ILUVLIGHT. Here's a few more thoughts.

It was a mistake on my part to not post the full verse. We don't want to consider half a verse, or half the Bible. But I think you'll find we only disagree on about half of it.

For God so loved the world - God so loved the world is the cause, but does not establish that he died to save every human being without exception. that he gave his only begotten Son - is the gift and the means, but does not establish that he died to save every human being without exception. that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. - Here comes the "in order that". Now here is where we disagree. You believe that "whosoever" establishes that "any sinner" can be saved. I believe that "believeth" defines and establishes the whosoever - whosoever believeth shall not perish is the end result of God loving the world and giving His Son. Whosoever believeth is the purpose that God gave His Son. Whosoever believeth will not perish and whosoever believeth will have everlasting life. You read the "whosoever" and think everybody. I read "believeth" and think the whosoever is qualified and quantified. But I cannot read the verse this way - For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him and whosoever believeth not in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. I appreciate your thoughts. This verse (John 3:16) was the beginning of my change, more than twenty years ago - and not from reading after Calvinists, of which I have done very little even to this day. When I saw that Jesus died to save all who believe and not all indiscriminately, it opened up a different view to me.

 

Hi rlvaughn;
I disagree with your view not just because of what Jn. 3:16 says. The very next thought put to paper is verse 17.
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
This verse is stating the He died so that the world might be saved. Granting all the previlage of choice can be it's only explanation. Election doesn't save. Predestination doesn't save. The Holy Spirit doesn't save. We are saved by the blood of Jesus Christ.
May Christ shine His light On Us All;
Mike

 

Now as I read that, I am see it saying that the death of Christ gave us grace which allowed us to believe.

However, if I read your comment right

You would be reading the last line to say that my faith is what caused God to give me grace.

Am I correct in what I think you're saying? </font>[/QUOTE]No, Nate. Because Grace is not a commodity that can be exchanged, or where ownership of it can be transferred, God does not "give" grace as a transferance of his grace. Grace is a behavioral attribute of the one possessing it. So when God "gives" His grace to man, that means that God is behaving toward man with favor that man does not merit. Therefore, no man "receives" God's grace, because it is not given for one to receive.

God Gave us a gift out of His Grace, his Only Begotten Son, to be our savior, and ALL who believe in His son can have everlasting life because Jesus took the penalty of all the sins of the world upon HIM self, so that we do not have to die but through faith in HIM can live eternally.

The Grace of God, His unmerited favor, has been on Mankind since he created man, with two notable exceptions, the People of Noah's time, and the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. Perhaps even the people of Pompeii.

Now God does actually bestow "blessings" on individuals, but His grace is for all mankind. "For God so loved the world,..."

The death of the Christ who was a gift of God out of His Grace, did nothing to enable us to receive his grace, but it did enable us to receive Salvation, the Gift of God to ALL who have faith in his son. God does the saving, we do the faithing!

One must simply know and understand the meaning of terms like Grace, in order to understand what it does.

 

Mike, I think we must agree that Christ died for ALL WHO WOULD BELIEVE. You believe that those who believe not could have believed. The true heart of the controversy is who can and will believe. We both believe (I think) that ALL THE WORLD will not be saved, because all will not believe. My position is that all will not believe because "men loved darkness rather than light" and need "help" to believe. Why does one man believe and not another? Is it because he is smarter, humbler, better? "For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light..." "No man can come to me except the Father which hath sent me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day." "He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

 

Everyone believes in a form of Limited Atonement unless you are a complete Universalist and believe everyone will eventually be saved.

The Arminian believes Jesus died for the entire world( That is for every single individual on the cross) YET in reality they believe Jesus made it only possible for every single individual to be saved, not that he secured the salvation of every individual. In the Arminian scheme Man's free will limits the effectiveness of the atonement for them.

The Calvinist believes Jesus died for the entire World, that is a number beyond counting from every race and nation ( 1 John 2:2, Revelation 7:1-17) and that Christ actually secured the salvation of those he died for and that in due time they will come to faith (Mt. 20:28). The Calvinist view of Ransom is a real ransom by the blood of Christ while the Arminian view is not.


C.H. Spurgeon noted the problems with Arminian General atonement in this way,

 

NO rlvaugn, Christ did not die for those who believed in him! He died to remove the penalty of sin from mankind so that those who do come to believe in Him might have life eternal.

Before Christ atoned for sin, those who died, because of the sins they sinned, could not have everlasting life. Not Noah, not Abraham, Not Joshua, not Caleb, or Jacob, or Isaac, etc. But because Jesus took the sins of the world upon himself and died the penalty for them, those who died prior to the Atonement can have eternal life just like we who have and know the truth.

No Christ did not die for only those who believe in Him, He died for all man kind! However it is not his death that saves mankind. Scriptures from cover to cover declare it is man's FAITH and FAITH alone, that Pleases God, and it is those who have faith in God, Jesus, that are saved from the second death. Atonement has not saved even one human. God alone saves man, and he only saves those who do believe in Him.

 

Another common misconception is that Calvinism rises or falls on the institutes and one cannot be a Calvinist if he/she hasn't read them. Truth is that the that doctrines now known as Calvinism existed long before Calvin. Calvin did a lot of studying and writing on them, as have many after him. Just as in other fields, we don't always read the earlier writings or thoughts or studies. We assume that later writings have built on that and taken it into account.

 

Hi rlvaughn;

I don't think that it is necessary to believe Christ died for only those who would believe. We do not agree on this point. Christ died for the whole world. I'm amazed that you refuse to see that in;
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Are you saying this verse does not say that it is possible that the whole world might be saved saved? is this why you have ignored my comment about it?.

This is exactly what I believe.

This is the contention that man has no choice in his own destiny. I believe with out a doubt that it is up to man to trust God. Trust is the reason that most will not be saved. It is us who first trust.
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Some say this is man woking for his Salvation. However that's because they are still thinking with the Calvinist mentality. God draws us through the hearing of His word. We acquire faith through His word. We are convicted by the Spirit. And we believe which is a work of God.
Joh 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
How ever trust is up to the fact if we accept Christ for who He is. What makes us accept? LOVE

I agree that man needs to hear the gospel and understand it, but I do not believe that man has to be saved first in order for this to happen.

The reason is trust, some men trust the Lord, I did, you did. Some men never trust the Lord. The reason is not because of mans moral ability. Man very clearly all through out scripture is able to choose good or evil. The knowledge of which Adam pass on to all his descendants. To say that man will only choose what he desires as I see it is ridiculous. I've chosen many things contrary to my desires, for not only my good but also for the good of others and did so against my desires. We all have.
Unsaved men have demonstrated the capacity to Love there friends enough to die for them to save there lives. Do you believe that to die was there original desire?

This is true as long as he is doing evil saved or not. What brings man to the light? The conviction that is brought on mans heart by the Holy Spirit. Can this be done without regeneration. Most certainly. The Holy Spirit is God and where He is concerned there is nothing impossible.

This of course is true. but then ALL are drawn because Christ was lifted up on that Cross.
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
This certainly doesn't mean all will be saved when raised up on that last day because all will be raised up. Every person will be resurrected some to glory some to condemnation.

Very true. I don't disagree with any of these scriptures.
May Christ shine His light On Us All;
Mike

 

Hi Kiffen;

This I disagree with. I do not believe everyone will be saved.

This could not be further from the truth. Christ did not save any one when he died on the cross. Mans free will doesn't limit anything and mans freewill is not limited to Salvation only because Of Christ' Atonement.

This is universalism. You just said that Christ died for everyone and every one who Christ died for will eventually come to Him.

C.H. Spurgeon. Isn't as special as Calvinist claim that he was.
This is why;

So he has men saved before they were ever born. Totally unscriptural. Not even provable. The limit of atonement is a Calvinist problem in that they attempt to limit it to certain special men of a false election. The election being limited to just a few. Again totally unscriptural.
May Christ Shine His light On Us all;
Mike

 

Hi, Mike. I understand that you don't think the possibilities of Christ's death are limited to only those who would believe. But I do think ultimately in your own way you do not believe that God's plan of salvation encompasses saving unbelievers. If not, then we probably do agree that Christ died to save all who believe. If Christ died to save the whole world, the whole world would be saved. There are some on both far ends of the "Calvinist/Arminian spectrum", evidently, who think that some unbelievers will ultimately be saved. "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent."

I don't disagree that John 3:17 says that Christ makes possible that the world might be saved. I do not believe that Christ's sacrifice means that God plans to save any who will not believe, or that any can come that the Father does not give to the Son (John 6:37).

When you wrote that LOVE makes us accept Christ, whose love do you mean? When you say that "To say that man will only choose what he desires" I'm not sure what you're talking about. I believe that man's choices are within and limited by his nature, not his desires. I can sit here all day long and want to soar the skies, but I am not a bird - it is not in my nature.

Interpreting John 6:44 as God drawing all men and including even the unsaved dead raised to condemnation causes some problems with the context. Jesus said ALL that the Father giveth shall come to me. Then says He will lose none, but will raise them on the last day. Then He further says that all who see the Son and believe have everlasting life, and will be raised up at the last day. This consistently refers to the resurrection of God's people in these verses.

Wes, please explain how you're using the word "atonement", when you say "atonement has not saved even one human". Surely the atonement must somehow include God in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself through His death? The death of Christ is the central piece of God saving man, not a sidelight. I think I don't understand what you mean. You don't mean that people can be saved by faith without the shed blood of Jesus Christ, do you?

Thanks.