No man perishes for want of an atonement

[Skandelon]

Plus, you all talk about how there isn't going to be anyone wanting atonement who doesn't get it, but I assure you on the judgement day when these lost souls are facing eternal torment they are not wanting to perish. They will surely be wanting atonement at that point.

Now, are they perishing for want of atonement, in that atonement was not available to them, or are they perishing because of their unbelief and unwillingness to abide by the condition set forth?

As Hodge said, "...it is offered to both classes conditionally. That condition is a cordial acceptance of it as the only ground of justification."

 

[kyredneck]

....Now, are they perishing for want of atonement, in that atonement was not available to them, or are they perishing because of their unbelief and unwillingness to abide by the condition set forth?...

They are condemned for their deeds. Period. Faith/belief is never once mentioned in the final judgement. It's for deeds done while in the body.

 

[JesusFan]

Here is a chart that might give you a better picture the way its laid out. Note the Presbyterians are much more fine tuned to this then are Baptists in most cases.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/sup_infr.htm

Thanks!
Think that at times it appears that there are some here who lean towards more of a presby sotierology view and others leaning towards a baptist view, both still DoG!

 

[JesusFan]

Do you affirm Hodges statement, "He did all that was necessary, so far as a satisfaction to justice is concerned, all that is required for the salvation of all men."

Or do you take "all men" to mean "all elect men?"

BTW, I'm not arguing that Hodge holds to an Arminian view of the atonement. He is clearly a Calvinist. I'm simply pointing out the distinction he clearly draws regarding God's doing "all that was necessary, so far as a satisfaction to justice" for even those who end up not believing, so that their perishing is not from a "lack of atonement," but for unbelief. And his clear teaching regarding Christ's work of substitution: "... all mankind were placed under the same constitution or covenant. What was demanded for the salvation of one was demanded for the salvation of all. Every man is required to satisfy the demands of the law...If those demands are satisfied by a representative or substitute, his work is equally available for all." For this view I have been ridiculed and demeaned by several Calvinists repeatedly on this board.

Would say from my perespective as being one of the so called" 4 pointers" in DoG...

That God DID place all sin for all mankind upon jesus on Cross, atonement sufficient to potentially be able to have all saved
BUT
that in order for it to be effectually, to actually get applied, person MSY reeceive it by faith, and ONLY those whom God has elected in Christ can and actually will place faith in christ!

 

[Aaron]

Bro. Skan, I keep thinking back to the OT and how that the sacrificial lamb, or whatever they used for the atonement of all of Israel, was for that, all of Israel. The atonement was for every Israelite, but only those who chose to believe what the OT prophets told them, actually entered into the Promised Land. It's that way now, Jesus' atonement was for everyone who would ever live on planet earth, but only those who choose to believe God, will get the atonement. If there is such as a thing as Limited Atonement, the ones who perish eternally(failing to believe) limited it themselves.

So, if I understand him correctly, I agree with what he said. Salvation, and also the atonement, was for all, and offered to all(those who know to doeth good, and doeth it not, that is).

Two things. Scan et al are saying the atonement IS applied to each man, saved or not. Their sins have been paid for. They are walking about washed clean of every sin and stain except one: that of unbelief. That is not what Charles Hodge is saying.

On the day of atonement, the sins of the nation were atoned for and the atonement applied to each Israelite. Remember, the levitical priesthood is not of faith. It was a carnal ordinance. It was all outward, and outward observance was mandatory or the offender was alienated—no longer considered an Israelite. The blood of goats only atoned in an earthly sense, and saved one only from the earthly consequences of his sins.

Israel does not represent the world. Egypt and Babylon represent the world, and they have no stone on the breastplate. They were not represented by the high priest, and they are not in view on the day of atonement.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Do you affirm Hodges statement, "He did all that was necessary, so far as a satisfaction to justice is concerned, all that is required for the salvation of all men."

Yep.

Or do you take "all men" to mean "all elect men?"

I take "all men" to mean all men who will come to Christ in true repentance and faith. They alone receive salvation. They are the elect. "My sheep hear My voice." Just the sheep, but all the sheep. Not the goats. Christ did not provide atonement for unbelievers. 'He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God' (John 8:47, NIV)

BTW, I'm not arguing that Hodge holds to an Arminian view of the atonement. He is clearly a Calvinist. I'm simply pointing out the distinction he clearly draws regarding God's doing "all that was necessary, so far as a satisfaction to justice" for even those who end up not believing, so that their perishing is not from a "lack of atonement," but for unbelief. And his clear teaching regarding Christ's work of substitution: "... all mankind were placed under the same constitution or covenant. What was demanded for the salvation of one was demanded for the salvation of all. Every man is required to satisfy the demands of the law...If those demands are satisfied by a representative or substitute, his work is equally available for all." For this view I have been ridiculed and demeaned by several Calvinists repeatedly on this board.

Well, I'm sorry you think you're being ridiculed, but I'm not surprised if you are because you are consistently misunderstanding what Hodge is saying.

Let me put it as simply as possible.

1. No one for whom the Lord Jesus Christ has shed His precious blood will perish eternally. Every one will be saved (John 6:39).

2. No one who comes to the Lord Jesus Christ in true faith and repentance will be turned away under any circumstances (John 6:40).

3. These two groups of people are the same (John 10:27-29).

BTW, the idea that people are not judged for their sins but only for unbelief is unscriptural (John 8:24 etc.).

Steve

 

[JesusFan]

Is this where the Arminians, at least some of them,get the idea of God was in Christ reconciling World back to Himself, so per them mankind was in "general" forginen of original/inherited Sin, and was back basically where adam was, making free will choice accept/reject Christ?
if so, this would be another area on concern, as it would mean that we would be the one to decide our own salvation, permitting God to save us!

 

[Skandelon]

They are condemned for their deeds. Period. Faith/belief is never once mentioned in the final judgement. It's for deeds done while in the body.

That is what you say, but Paul clearly states, "They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved," not because they did evil deeds....even those in heaven did evil deeds.

 

[Skandelon]

Two things. Scan et al are saying the atonement IS applied to each man, saved or not.

Two things. 1. Where did I say that "the atonement IS applied to each man?" The atonement is applied only to those who believe. It is provided and offered to all mankind with a condition, as the quote from Hodge above clearly states.

2. Willis is smart enough not to believe anything you tell him about what I believe because you are notorious for putting words in my mouth.

 

[Skandelon]

Yep.
I take "all men" to mean all men who will come to Christ in true repentance and faith.

Then clearly it is you who is misreading Hodge, because it is abundantly clear that this statement is to address the genuine universal call of the gospel to both the elect and non-elect, as proven by this statement: "The righteousness of Christ being of infinite value or merit, and being in its nature precisely what all men need, may be offered to all men. It is thus offered to the elect and to the non-elect; and it is offered to both classes conditionally. That condition is a cordial acceptance of it as the only ground of justification."

So, throughout this discourse Hodge is addressing "all men" to include "both classes," not just the elect as you wrongly answered.

Well, I'm sorry you think you're being ridiculed, but I'm not surprised if you are because you are consistently misunderstanding what Hodge is saying.

You have not dealt with the substance of Hodge's quote. You have only restated your version of Calvinism's atonement all the while claiming Hodge doesn't say what he clearly says.

BTW, the idea that people are not judged for their sins but only for unbelief is unscriptural (John 8:24 etc.).

They will perish for their unbelief, or their rejection of the truth. I've provided countless texts they say those very words verbatim.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Then clearly it is you who is misreading Hodge, because it is abundantly clear that this statement is to address the genuine universal call of the gospel to both the elect and non-elect, as proven by this statement: "The righteousness of Christ being of infinite value or merit, and being in its nature precisely what all men need, may be offered to all men. It is thus offered to the elect and to the non-elect; and it is offered to both classes conditionally. That condition is a cordial acceptance of it as the only ground of justification."

So, throughout this discourse Hodge is addressing "all men" to include "both classes," not just the elect as you wrongly answered.

You have not dealt with the substance of Hodge's quote. You have only restated your version of Calvinism's atonement all the while claiming Hodge doesn't say what he clearly says.


They will perish for their unbelief, or their rejection of the truth. I've provided countless texts they say those very words verbatim.

I dont know what I am missing here but do you really think that a man of Hodges stature in Princeton at the time would forgo all his beliefs on the doctrines of atonement, sweeping them aside & start promoting Arminian doctrine? How long do you think he would have stayed as a person of credibility & stature in the Calvinist community & the Presbyterian church?

 

[Skandelon]

I dont know what I am missing here but do you really think that a man of Hodges stature in Princeton at the time would forgo all his beliefs on the doctrines of atonement, sweeping them aside & start promoting Arminian doctrine? How long do you think he would have stayed as a person of credibility & stature in the Calvinist community & the Presbyterian church?

Read what I wrote. I CLEARLY stated that he was NOT promoting Arminian views. He is promoting Calvinistic views, but they just so happen not to line up with some of the more extreme (or less informed) "Calvinistic" views expressed here. There are some Calvinistic scholars who do handle Limited Atonement differently than others....this is evidence of that.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

As a side note though.....J.I. Packer wrote.....The gospel is not "believe that Christ died for everybody's sins, and therefore for yours," any more than it is, " believe that Christ died only for certain peoples sins, and so perhaps not for yours."The gospel is, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, who died for sins, and now offers Himself as your Savior. " This is the message which we are to take to the world. We have no business to ask to put faith in any view of the extent of the atonement; our job is to point them to the living Christ, and summon them to trust in Him.

I concur with that assessment!:thumbs:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Read what I wrote. I CLEARLY stated that he was NOT promoting Arminian views. He is promoting Calvinistic views, but they just so happen not to line up with some of the more extreme (or less informed) "Calvinistic" views expressed here. There are some Calvinistic scholars who do handle Limited Atonement differently than others....this is evidence of that.

Well then brother, Ive not heard this & its news to me but Im fairly young in the faith. I would like to see other peoples views recorded so I can verify.

 

[Robert Snow]

Yeah, OK, you do that.



Sounds good until you know the Word of God on the matter...

Too bad Charles Hodge didn't have you around to straighten him out. After all, I'm sure your book on systematic theology will out sell Hodges given enough time.

 

[Aaron]

Two things. 1. Where did I say that "the atonement IS applied to each man?" The atonement is applied only to those who believe. It is provided and offered to all mankind with a condition, as the quote from Hodge above clearly states.

2. Willis is smart enough not to believe anything you tell him about what I believe because you are notorious for putting words in my mouth.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=70813&page=3

But now that you've learned to be concise, let's clarify your judge allegory:

Are the sins of all men paid for? Even those of the unbelievers. Yes or no?

 

[JesusFan]

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=70813&page=3

But now that you've learned to be concise, let's clarify your judge allegory:

Are the sins of all men paid for? Even those of the unbelievers. Yes or no?

Question...

can they be paid for, but the person not receive benefit for their payment?

 

[Skandelon]

Question...

can they be paid for, but the person not receive benefit for their payment?

ding ding ding :love2: Give that man a cookie!

Thus, the difference between being provided (provisional atonement) verses the atonement already being "applied," as you wrongly attributed to my view.

As Hodge says, "...his work is equally available for all."

 

[JesusFan]

ding ding ding :love2: Give that man a cookie!

Thus, the difference between being provided (provisional atonement) verses the atonement already being "applied," as you wrongly attributed to my view.

As Hodge says, "...his work is equally available for all."

but Not effectual towards all, right?

 

[preacher4truth]

but Not effectual towards all, right?

It's effectual only for the elect, Matthew 1:21, 2 Timothy 2:10. If each of us would preach the Gospel with this understanding (2 Timothy 2:8-10) that there are elect out there that will respond and be saved, we would do well. This is what our Lord did, and also what Paul did, it was also seen at Pentecost, as His people believed, those that are not His, of course did not believe. The Gospel message reveals those who belong to Him and those who do not, and at times those who at first don't imediately believe, and perhaps even show animosity toward the truth (as Paul in 1 Timothy 1) may at a latter time by coming to faith prove they are His elect.