The Atonement.

"But in principle I have no objection to a pitch invasion if the team need a hand!"

Let me get this straight. I use "storm the field" as an exaggeration and you lecture me that one person cannot storm the field. Yet you have no objection to conducting a one man "invasion" of the field? One man does not an invasion make.

 

Scripture is where you find that God loves you not in laughing at others!

Maybe to you but you said 'I' would stampede the field not that I would join the stampede.

And the moment I make an assumption I would be shot down would I not? I see what you write not what you might mean.

To storm the field alone is similar to stampeding the field alone is it not? You do it again.

A header you mean? Head volly HaHa! very good becomes brilliant when coupled with, 'I don't know how you assumed that I had no soccer knowledge.'

No you did not but that does not mean you know your bible does it? What's curse and Jesus being cursed mean. Have you harmonised scripture or just imagine to demonise me?

john. </font>[/QUOTE]

 

Not all Wes because all would include Eli's house but Eli's house had no atonement made for it don't you know?
1 Sam 3:14 Therefore, I swore to the house of Eli, `The guilt of Eli's house will never be atoned for by sacrifice or offering.'
But of course you know I have mentioned this before I think. It pins you.

Refusal to accept limited atonement without a scriptural argument against the blindingly obvious but just opinion is not useful to you. I use scripture, 1 Sam 3:14 Therefore, I swore to the house of Eli, `The guilt of Eli's house will never be atoned for by sacrifice or offering.' and scripture says that Jesus did not atone for some which leaves me with the impression that atonement is limited. Nothing ignorant in that is there? Not an opinion is it? Just plain fact. Limited atonement destroys your doctrine completely.

What you do with the information is up to God.

john. </font>[/QUOTE]What I do is "rightly divide the Word of Truth". What you do is fail to understand the difference between atonement for people and atonement for sin!

Eli's house Cursed God, and Continued to do so. There can be no atonement for those who do likewise. Have you not heard there is an unpardonable (not un-atoneable) Sin? What Eli's house continued to do is Blaspheme God without REPENTANCE! Those who do that exclude themselves from God's mercy!

You are not sharp enough to "pin me" with your hoaked up, convoluted interpretations. You're not sharp enough to understand scripture!

There is no "limited atonement", except for those who refuse it!

 

Wes,

Do you deny the believer receives the righteousness of Christ, i.e., imputed righteousness?

Do you contend that Christ provides pardon without eternal life, and that the pardoned sinner merits eternal life through sanctification of the Holy Ghost, i.e., faith working by love?

By grace,
Bob Krajcik
Mansfield, Ohio

 

Well John...nothing you said makes sense.

Now you are calling me a chicken? Well...why don't you bite my head off then? You all do bite the heads off chickens at them soccer matches in England don't you?

Actually I "stormed the field". I gave you the VERB definitions of cursed along with some questions for you to answer...and you ignored them. John...you don't have a chance in h e double hockey sticks of convincing me that God hated His OWN Son, thereby hating Himself. Are you calling God a mentally unstable tyrant? Are you "comparing God to Hitler"?

 

deleted as I lost my mind for a minute...tryin to keep track of many posts at the same time...

 

John...and he probably denies that God hated His OWN Son, thereby hating Himself.

 

I believe that Jesus atoned for Sin so that mankind through faith in God, and Jesus is God the Son, can have everlasting life just as Jesus said to Nicodemus in John 3:16-18. Without Jesus atoning for sin, NO MAN COULD HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE, "for all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God". Now that ALL sin in ALL times has been atoned, whosoever believeth in God should not perish (die) but have everlasting life!

Just as Abraham's faith was counted unto him for righteousness, our faith is counted unto US for righteousness!

It is our FAITH in God that sanctifies us for everlasting life, while those lacking faith are cast into the lake of fire! FAITH is what separates the sheep from the goats!

I believe that Jesus' atonement for sin is the believer's Justification before the Throne of God.

By your post you indicate that you believe Jesus atonement for sin is equal to pardon. You are confused. I think you misuse the the terms. Atonement means that someone served your penalty for the crime you committed. Pardon means you were released from the penalty with no one taking your place! Pardon has not happened, Atonement has!

You also indicate that you believe eternal life is merited by man. Where do you find that in the scriptures? All I can find is that Eternal life is a free Gift of God to those who believe in Him.

You also indicate that faith requires love or vise versa. Though they both work well together, neither requires the other, they are both attributes of the one possessing them.

Imputed righteousness? NO! Righteousness is a product of faith! God gives man every reason to have faith in him without giving him the faith. For those who have faith in God, they strive to be righteous before the throne of God. No, righteousness is not imputed, meaning "placed into man by God", it is the manifestation of man's faith in God!

 

Been there done that


NO COMMENT!

 

John...I already answered your question. And asked you some back.

As for judging Canadians by me...suit yourself. Was that an attempt to "embarass" me? Hmmm?

I could use the Bible...but as I said before...when my opinion is in LINE with the Bible, why should I bother? I am not a mindless peon. Any mindless peon can copy and paste a Scripture out of context.

Now here's a question for you to answer: "Are you calling God a mentally unstable tyrant? Are you "comparing God to Hitler"?"

 

Any attempt to avoid the question is an admission that yes, you are calling Him that.

 

Not judging is "judging". You implied a judgement against me that you tried to veil by saying you "wouldn't" judge me. I'm not stupid John.

No...I don't have to answer it again. You can go back and find it. You aren't lazy, even if you are a peon.

Now here's a question for you to answer: "Are you calling God a mentally unstable tyrant? Are you "comparing God to Hitler"?"

Oh...and when you answer it...I want you to use Scripture. It is apparent around here that that is a must...no room for using our God given minds here.

 

Why? Ashamed to admit to not believing God would be so cruel?

john. </font>[/QUOTE]Not what you think!

Just not playing your childish game.