The definitive evidence against only limited atonement.

[Dave G]

In your opinion, how does this fit in with Puritan teaching of the necessity of faith and repentance before justification and the fact that there must be sanctification and perseverance in the life of a saint?

I don't agree with the Puritans on many subjects, and the underlined is one of them.

What I see in the Bible is that God justifies His saints without any cooperation with Him on their part.
I believe the Scriptures teach that justification ( being made just, or righteous in His sight ) took place apart from anything we as men may do or have, and that justification was strictly God's prerogative to bestow on whom He wishes.

In other words, only those His Son died for on the cross are justified, and no others.

That the Bible teaches the necessity of faith and repentance is not something that I disagree with, neither do I disagree with the teaching that sanctification and perseverance in the faith are things that must be present and happen in the life of someone who is saved;
What I disagree with, is the teaching that those things are required from us by God before He justifies us.

Stated differently,
As with modern "Arminianism" and many other systematic theologies and teachings from different denominations,
I disagree with the doctrine / teaching that God's grace is dependent upon something that we do.

To me, God relies on nothing except His own decision to have mercy and compassion towards someone, when it comes to deciding who He wanted His Son to save.

 

[AustinC]

@Silverhair,
That the particular redemption can be shown from Scripture does not disprove a general redemption. Luke 22:20-21 stands as definitive evidence. Was not limited to those at the table nor excluded Judas.

God says," I will have mercy on whom I have mercy" and harden whom He wills.

And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, “Take this, and divide it among yourselves. For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. But behold, the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table. For the Son of Man goes as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed!” And they began to question one another, which of them it could be who was going to do this.
~ Luke 22:15-23

 

[Dave G]

To reply to the OP:

I'm sorry, but according to my understanding of the Scriptures, I see nothing in His word that exists as definitive evidence against the fact that Jesus died only for His sheep.
Romans 5 was written to believers and only believers, which means that anything stated there is for their eyes and minds alone.
The things stated there apply to them, not the casual reader who has never believed on Christ through the preaching of His word and the calling of His Spirit.

All other passages that seem to teach a general atonement can be understood, either by context or by understanding what "world", "every man" and "all" mean in their proper contexts in each letter and throughout His word, as applying to only those that the Lord has taken for Himself out of the nations as a people for His namesake.

Referencing the passage in Luke, I clearly understand ( though I did not always ) from other passages that Judas, even though He was present at the table, was not included in the "you" because the Lord Jesus has already told us in other places who Judas was and what he was reserved for.

There is no way that Judas could have been included, because the Lord tells us in John 6:39 and John 10:27-29 that He will lose none of the ones His Father gave to Him....
Yet Judas was indeed lost, as he was declared the "son of perdition" and "a devil", and was lost so that the Scriptures would be fulfilled.


May God bless you.

 

[AustinC]

What I see is a great deal of blow and bluster from someone that does not trust scripture. You can not understand how anyone could understand the bible unless they see it just like you. Having looked at calvinism I find that it does not hold true to the bible so why would I follow that theological view.

Of course you see it in a twisted manner. One can only expect you to twist and not believe the vast passages that stand against your false teaching. Ephesians 1 and 2 show you are wrong and now you fall on your boogeyman to be your crutch.

 

[DaveXR650]

That the Bible teaches the necessity of faith and repentance is not something that I disagree with, neither do I disagree with the teaching that sanctification and perseverance in the faith are things that must be present and happen in the life of someone who is saved;
What I disagree with, is the teaching that those things are required from us by God before He justifies us.

Good to hear that. And I agree that a Christian is already justified before he goes on about his sanctification and Christian walk. There could be 5 more threads on how assurance and perseverance is explained in light of this. They're going to close this thread soon I think so thanks for replying.

 

[Silverhair]

@Silverhair,
That the particular redemption can be shown from Scripture does not disprove a general redemption. Luke 22:20-21 stands as definitive evidence. Was not limited to those at the table nor excluded Judas.

I don't disagree that we some people, Paul for example, were called and saved directly by Christ Jesus. But we also know that all those that are saved have to freely trust in Christ Jesus. God does not drag anyone to salvation. Therein lays the problem with calvinism as I see it.

 

[Silverhair]

Of course you see it in a twisted manner. One can only expect you to twist and not believe the vast passages that stand against your false teaching. Ephesians 1 and 2 show you are wrong and now you fall on your boogeyman to be your crutch.

Austin you have a problem with scripture I do not. When you deny clear scripture I do not see much hope for you. Perhaps God in His mercy will enlighten you to the truth, but you always have the option to reject that truth as you do now.

 

[37818]

I don't disagree that we some people, Paul for example, were called and saved directly by Christ Jesus. But we also know that all those that are saved have to freely trust in Christ Jesus. God does not drag anyone to salvation. Therein lays the problem with calvinism as I see it.

The purpose of this thread was show one truth. That the particular redemption is definitely not exclusively true without the general redemption. Only need one proof text to show this. Luke 22:20-21 is it.

 

[AustinC]

The purpose of this thread was show one truth. That the particular redemption is definitely not exclusively true without the general redemption. Only need one proof text to show this. Luke 22:20-21 is it.

That passage doesn't prove your assertion at all. In fact, in the light of the passover, it establishes particular redemption with nothing to support a philosophical general redemption, which is wishful thinking on your part.

 

[Silverhair]

That passage doesn't prove your assertion at all. In fact, in the light of the passover, it establishes particular redemption with nothing to support a philosophical general redemption, which is wishful thinking on your part.

Then again you ignore any scripture that does show a general redemption. How many times do you have to be shown them before you will admit that they are true?

You have so much invested in calvinism that I question if you can even look at a text of scripture without reading calvinism into it.

 

[AustinC]

Then again you ignore any scripture that does show a general redemption. How many times do you have to be shown them before you will admit that they are true?

You have so much invested in calvinism that I question if you can even look at a text of scripture without reading calvinism into it.

I haven't ignored any scripture. Scripture just doesn't present a mythical general redemption. It's a figment of your demand to be ruler of your life.

 

[Silverhair]

I haven't ignored any scripture. Scripture just doesn't present a mythical general redemption. It's a figment of your demand to be ruler of your life.

Well seems to me that you have failed to provide any text that supports your view and at the same time you dismiss those that show your view is wrong.

God may be merciful to you and open your eyes to the truth but you have to be willing to accept it. Unfortunately it looks like that is not likely to happen with you because of your stubborn pride.

How many scriptures are you going to dismiss? I had really hoped that I could get you to listen to reason but like they say "pride goes before the fall'. Humble yourself before God before it is to late.

 

[AustinC]

Well seems to me that you have failed to provide any text that supports your view and at the same time you dismiss those that show your view is wrong.

God may be merciful to you and open your eyes to the truth but you have to be willing to accept it. Unfortunately it looks like that is not likely to happen with you because of your stubborn pride.

How many scriptures are you going to dismiss? I had really hoped that I could get you to listen to reason but like they say "pride goes before the fall'. Humble yourself before God before it is to late.

Of course it seems this way to you. You ignore the six pages of Bible verses I provided which show you your error.
God has opened my eyes, which is why I left your false teachings many years ago.
What I did was to not dismiss any scripture and understand that God is Sovereign. He chooses particular people to redeem. This truth runs from Genesis to Revelation. It is a blessed truth.

 

[Brightfame52]

In the sense that faith is the "cause" of justification then no. But is it absolutely essential that faith is necessary or else there is no justification then yes, in that sense it is a "condition". If as a Calvinist, I am going to be so precise as to be upset when some Baptist or Arminian says he had to believe, then I have to realize that we can go so far in the other direction that we are afraid to say "Yes, I believed". Yes or no, is there ANY sense in which faith is a condition of salvation. (Not that faith is the cause or merit of salvation but that without faith there will be no salvation)? This was the opinion of Jonathan Edwards and I think you can get it from the WCF too.

So from what this says, your answer is yes, that Justification before God is conditioned on what man does. Thats works all day long and its unscriptural.

 

[Brightfame52]

Did you not understand what post #57 says? Go back and read it and then tell me what it states clearly.

Why dont you tell me clearly, Yes or No to the question ? Are you afraid ?

 

[Brightfame52]

Don't you?

No, so whats your answer ?

 

[DaveXR650]

So from what this says, your answer is yes, that Justification before God is conditioned on what man does. Thats works all day long and its unscriptural.

No, justification does not come before belief in the sense of a time line and it is a condition in the sense that without belief you don't have justification. I agree with the WCF and with the Puritans that Jesus is not sitting up in Heaven saying to the Father, "We did all we could, now let's hope some of them believe". THAT would be wrong. You are a classic hyper-Calvinist according to the definition of it by Flavel and J.I. Packer. It's OK with me and I think you are a 100% fellow believer but I think that soteriology can lead to problems with some folks.

 

[Silverhair]

Of course it seems this way to you. You ignore the six pages of Bible verses I provided which show you your error.
God has opened my eyes, which is why I left your false teachings many years ago.
What I did was to not dismiss any scripture and understand that God is Sovereign. He chooses particular people to redeem. This truth runs from Genesis to Revelation. It is a blessed truth.

I did not ignore the 6 pages, I answered them you just do not like the answers.
Actually you do dismiss a number of scriptures or you read them through the calvinist lens which amounts to the same thing.

 

[Silverhair]

Why dont you tell me clearly, Yes or No to the question ? Are you afraid ?

Why don't you read what I wrote? You want a Y/N answer then read the text or are you unable to do that? Post # 57 in case you forgot which post where I answered you.

 

[Brightfame52]

No, justification does not come before belief in the sense of a time line and it is a condition in the sense that without belief you don't have justification. I agree with the WCF and with the Puritans that Jesus is not sitting up in Heaven saying to the Father, "We did all we could, now let's hope some of them believe". THAT would be wrong. You are a classic hyper-Calvinist according to the definition of it by Flavel and J.I. Packer. It's OK with me and I think you are a 100% fellow believer but I think that soteriology can lead to problems with some folks.

Friend your position is Justification by works !