The definitive evidence against only limited atonement.

[Silverhair]

Why do you think ? Dont you believe, think that sinners Christ substituted for shall yet die in their sins ? Yes or No

Well here again I must tell you read your bible without the Calvinist glasses. The text is clear but you can't see it as you are to invested in your man made theology.

 

[Silverhair]

God is Sovereign no matter what man may or may not do. Therefore, God by His Sovereign decree, atones for those whom He chooses to atone. Man's lack of faith cannot thwart the Sovereign will of God or His atonement. Yet, you have openly declared that the atonement is not effective to any who choose not to believe.
Silverhair, you are the one who limits what God can or cannot do. You pronounce mans will as greater than God's will. You do not view God as Sovereign. You can make all the claims you want, but since you declare that unbelief is greater than Jesus atonement, you make man greater than God.
Your idea of God is not a God who is Sovereign.

So what you are saying is that what the bible says is not true as it does not agree with your Calvinism. You really need to start trusting what the bible says and get away from your Calvinist theology. Why don't you trust clear scripture instead of your Calvinist theology.

As I said before you follow your man made Calvinist theology and I will just follow Christ Jesus.

 

[Silverhair]

From what I can tell, Jonathan Edwards taught this also, and he had fairly good Calvinist cred. If you think about this, most Calvinists believe this, as well as free will Baptists and regular Baptists. Some particular Baptists and hyper-Calvinists believe that if you are part of the elect then you were either saved at the time of Christ's death or even from the foundation of the world, and that saving faith is when you realize you are elect.

JE may have taught something like this but I am quite sure he did not agree with man having a free will, could be wrong on the free will. Calvinists want to have God pick out a select group to be saved and that sounds nice but it is not biblical is it.
1Ti 4:10 For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.
Joh 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

The Calvinist view may give some people comfort but I do not see it in the bible. What I see is that God desires all to be saved,
1Ti 2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
So if that is true, and the bible says it is, then we have two options.
1] God is being disingenuous, in others lying to us. He really does not want all to be saved.
or
2] God wants to save all but has given man the ability to accept or reject salvation, in other words free will.

 

[AustinC]

JE may have taught something like this but I am quite sure he did not agree with man having a free will, could be wrong on the free will. Calvinists want to have God pick out a select group to be saved and that sounds nice but it is not biblical is it.
1Ti 4:10 For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.
Joh 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

The Calvinist view may give some people comfort but I do not see it in the bible. What I see is that God desires all to be saved,
1Ti 2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
So if that is true, and the bible says it is, then we have two options.
1] God is being disingenuous, in others lying to us. He really does not want all to be saved.
or
2] God wants to save all but has given man the ability to accept or reject salvation, in other words free will.

It's not what "Calvinists want." It's what God says. This is a huge point that you refuse to acknowledge. God's choosing and elective grace is taught by God, in the Bible. Someday, you will be forced to face this fact, rather than make things up about what other Christians "want."
The vast number of passages where God tells us we are chosen, far exceeds your cherrypicked verses out of context.

 

[AustinC]

Here's a pdf showing the volume of scripture teaching God's choosing, election and predestination.

Silverhair seems to not know these passages.

 

[Silverhair]

I myself have a hard time with the concept of a "limited" atonement in the sense that it is often taught. If you teach this with the idea that before time began, in God's mind, certain people would have Christ die for them and THAT would be the reason that some are saved and others, before they were even born were doomed with no possibility of redemption.

But, for everyone who believes that no one can come to God without action by the Holy Spirit then could you not work backwards in logic and arrive at a particular redemption (atonement). Did the Holy Spirit know who he was going to act on? Is anyone else going to get saved? If the HS knows who they are, when did he know this. If he always knew this then why is it so terrible to say he knew this when Jesus went to the cross. Did Jesus know who he was going to die for? Several verses indicate he did. Then what's wrong with saying that the one's who come by faith because of the action of the Holy Spirit are the one's Jesus died for. What I'm trying to say is that it is possible to believe that the atonement was particular or limited without saying that THAT is the reason why people don't get saved. These doctrines have to be taken together or they never make sense.

There is a vast difference between God knowing who will come to faith in His son and God choosing who will come to faith in His son.

No matter how you try to cut it if God has chosen a select group to be saved then that means that He has chosen a select group to be doomed.

Notice what Jn 16;8-9 says
Joh 16:8 "And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment;
Joh 16:9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me;

Notice it is not just a select group that are convicted. Some respond in anger some with indifference but some will seek God.

Calvinists want God to limit the atonement so that it is only for a select group, but that is not what is in the bible.

God desires all to be saved, He sent His son be a propitiation for all, He said those that believe will be saved those that do not will be condemned.

Some Calvinists on BB have said the only way God can be sovereign is if He determines everything. They want to limit God so that He fits into the box of their making. The God of the bible will not be put in that box.

 

[Silverhair]

It's not what "Calvinists want." It's what God says. This is a huge point that you refuse to acknowledge. God's choosing and elective grace is taught by God, in the Bible. Someday, you will be forced to face this fact, rather than make things up about what other Christians "want."
The vast number of passages where God tells us we are chosen, far exceeds your cherrypicked verses out of context.

The verses that the us that we are expected to choose are the ones you ignore. We are chosen for service but you would not see that as it does not fit your theology.

 

[AustinC]

The verses that the us that we are expected to choose are the ones you ignore. We are chosen for service but you would not see that as it does not fit your theology.

Not true. I have addressed them with you on multiple occasions.

Indeed, God chooses us and then gives us work to do, which He foreordained for us to do. (Ephesians 2:10) No one denies that. But, that comes after God chose to save us by his elective will. I provided a six page pdf for you.

 

[DaveXR650]

There is a vast difference between God knowing who will come to faith in His son and God choosing who will come to faith in His son.

The thing I would suggest is that you face the same problem if you believe that the Holy Spirit is in any fashion, necessary for salvation. We know for a fact that everyone does not get saved so if you believe that the deciding factor is the work of the Holy Spirit then God is in some way choosing. Even if you believe the work is only convicting, if it is decisive then it involves choosing. There is scripture to back that up. If you say that everyone gets a prevenient type of grace to enable them to choose - well, that sounds nice but there isn't any scripture to back that up. If you say man naturally is left with enough within himself to choose wisely then you are going against a lot of scripture. So I'm just suggesting that if God is choosing at any point of the chain of salvation then there is no reason why the atonement could not be limited to the ones God will later choose to save. The one thing I would agree with is the concern that people have that it is possible to want to come to Christ and not be able because Christ did not die for you. That would directly contradict scripture and unless someone can show me differently I don't think that is the way limited atonement is ever taught.

 

[Silverhair]

Not true. I have addressed them with you on multiple occasions.

Indeed, God chooses us and then gives us work to do, which He foreordained for us to do. (Ephesians 2:10) No one denies that. But, that comes after God chose to save us by his elective will. I provided a six page pdf for you.

Read your PDF and you may think that it proves your case but not so. As I have said many times it is only because you read through your Calvinist glasses that you see what you want to see, it is not in the scriptures.

 

[Silverhair]

The thing I would suggest is that you face the same problem if you believe that the Holy Spirit is in any fashion, necessary for salvation. We know for a fact that everyone does not get saved so if you believe that the deciding factor is the work of the Holy Spirit then God is in some way choosing. Even if you believe the work is only convicting, if it is decisive then it involves choosing. There is scripture to back that up. If you say that everyone gets a prevenient type of grace to enable them to choose - well, that sounds nice but there isn't any scripture to back that up. If you say man naturally is left with enough within himself to choose wisely then you are going against a lot of scripture. So I'm just suggesting that if God is choosing at any point of the chain of salvation then there is no reason why the atonement could not be limited to the ones God will later choose to save. The one thing I would agree with is the concern that people have that it is possible to want to come to Christ and not be able because Christ did not die for you. That would directly contradict scripture and unless someone can show me differently I don't think that is the way limited atonement is ever taught.

I am confused as to why you would say that if the Holy Spirit is in any way involved then God is choosing. Many people hear the gospel message but not all accept it. Even though it is a convicting message. So your saying that God chooses those that will accept it and those that will reject it.

When you say there is not scripture that backs up the idea of prevenient grace you are in error. Jesus does this very thing when He seeks (Luk_19:10), draws (Joh_12:32) and knocks upon the heart's door of the lost. (Rev_3:20) Meanwhile, the Holy Spirit convicts the heart (Joh_16:8), pricks the heart (Act_26:14), pierces the heart (Act_2:37) and even opens the heart to respond to the Gospel. (Act_16:14) This is Illumination of Prevenient Grace.

You most likely will disagree and that is fine. I see God reaching out to His creation with a good faith offer of salvation made to all not just some as Calvinism would have it.

God foreknowing who will come to faith does not cause them to come to faith. If you disagree with this then you have to accept that God knowing who will commit terrible sins causes them to commit those sins. Calvinists reject mans free will to trust in Christ Jesus but God does not.

 

[DaveXR650]

I am confused as to why you would say that if the Holy Spirit is in any way involved then God is choosing. Many people hear the gospel message but not all accept it. Even though it is a convicting message. So your saying that God chooses those that will accept it and those that will reject it.

What I said was slightly different than the above. I said that if the Holy Spirit is in any way necessary or decisive then God is choosing. And that makes all the difference. What you are calling prevenient grace given to everyone is close to what the WCF calls effectual calling in chapter 10. The difference is that the Calvinists say it is the deciding factor and it is given to those who are then enabled to come to Christ. The Calvinist doesn't say that the grace has just enough effectiveness that it gives the person enough grace for THEM to make the decisive choice.

If I'm watching a bunch of toddlers and there is a bunch of steps to climb you have the following possibilities. Some may not care about going up the steps at all. Some may want to but can't on their own. Some may want to and be able to climb up on their own. What I'm saying is that if I pick some up and carry them - or if I simply help some of the one's that can't make it on their own then I'm still choosing who gets up the steps. The only group that truly had their own choice was the group that could do it on their own and also wanted to on their own. In the spiritual sense that would be a Pelagian free will and you are totally on your own to make it or not. So what I was trying to say was that not only strict high Calvinists but all Baptists and moderate Calvinists that believe you can't come without the direct action of the Holy Spirit DO believe that God is choosing.

And if God is choosing at the point of belief then why is it so odious to suggest that those same people are the ones Jesus died for?

 

[Brightfame52]

I have not done that your Calvinism sure does though, although you cannot see it.

Sadly but you have limited the efficaciousness of the saving death of Christ since you believe sinners He died for still die in their sins.

 

[Brightfame52]

Well here again I must tell you read your bible without the Calvinist glasses. The text is clear but you can't see it as you are to invested in your man made theology.

Stand up for what you believe, Don't you believe, think that sinners Christ substituted for shall yet die in their sins ? Yes or No

 

[Silverhair]

What I said was slightly different than the above. I said that if the Holy Spirit is in any way necessary or decisive then God is choosing. And that makes all the difference. What you are calling prevenient grace given to everyone is close to what the WCF calls effectual calling in chapter 10. The difference is that the Calvinists say it is the deciding factor and it is given to those who are then enabled to come to Christ. The Calvinist doesn't say that the grace has just enough effectiveness that it gives the person enough grace for THEM to make the decisive choice.

If I'm watching a bunch of toddlers and there is a bunch of steps to climb you have the following possibilities. Some may not care about going up the steps at all. Some may want to but can't on their own. Some may want to and be able to climb up on their own. What I'm saying is that if I pick some up and carry them - or if I simply help some of the one's that can't make it on their own then I'm still choosing who gets up the steps. The only group that truly had their own choice was the group that could do it on their own and also wanted to on their own. In the spiritual sense that would be a Pelagian free will and you are totally on your own to make it or not. So what I was trying to say was that not only strict high Calvinists but all Baptists and moderate Calvinists that believe you can't come without the direct action of the Holy Spirit DO believe that God is choosing.

And if God is choosing at the point of belief then why is it so odious to suggest that those same people are the ones Jesus died for?

At the right time, appointed by him, God effectually calls all those and only those whom he has predestined to life WCF “The Calvinist doesn't say that the grace has just enough effectiveness that it gives the person enough grace for THEM to make the decisive choice.”



And there in lays the problem as I see it. The verses that I referenced do not show limitation of the action but instead just the opposite. Seeks the lost, draws all men, if anyone hears, convicts the world, why resist, pierces the heart, opens to respond. Do you not see all these show that the person, although experiencing the grace of God, are not forced to respond. They have to choose to accept or reject the good faith offer. This good faith offer is also not restricted to just the select group as Calvinism would have it.



While you may want to hold to what the WCF, a man made book, says I will just stick with what the bible says. I do agree that Christ Jesus died for those that are saved because He died for the sins of the whole world and those that are saved are a subset of the whole world. Where we differ is when you say that He died only for them or called only them.



I have the WCF and LBCF and have read through them. While the men that wrote them were well meaning I think they went to far and stepped beyond scripture and instead worked to support Calvinism.

 

[JonC]

Limited Atonement is wrong (in terms of Calvinism), but it is based on some truth.

Calvinism affirms Chriat died for the Church (for His Sheep). What Calvinism essentially denies is that Christ is the Propitiation for not only our sins but the sins of the World (it does this by redefining "World" and using it un such a way it is not used in the surrounding passages).

Calvinistic Limited Atonement also denies that the Cross was God reconciling man to Himself, and then we have the ministry of reconciliation urging men to be reconciled to God (it does this, again, by redefining Scripture and twisting it to meet Reformed theology).

Calvinism also uses the word "atonement" to as the ANE pagan sacrifice system rather than the biblical word "reconciliation".

Probably the most obvious error of Calvinistic Limited Atonement is denying that man is reconciled to God through Christ's death and men through His Life.

 

[Silverhair]

Sadly but you have limited the efficaciousness of the saving death of Christ since you believe sinners He died for still die in their sins.

Sadly you have chosen to place your trust in the Calvinist view for salvation.

Christ Jesus came to seek and to save the lost Luk_19:10, this includes all people Joh_12:32, and He was the propitiation for all sins 1Jn 2:2. But we are also told that we have to do something, we have to believe Joh 3:18 and why we might do so Eph 1:13. Salvation is conditional, the person has to make a choice Rom 10:9-10, the sad part many will reject the offer and die in their sins.

So you see Christ Jesus did indeed die for sinners that will be lost because they reject the good faith offer of salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

 

[Silverhair]

Stand up for what you believe, Don't you believe, think that sinners Christ substituted for shall yet die in their sins ? Yes or No

Read post # 57

 

[Silverhair]

Limited Atonement is wrong (in terms of Calvinism), but it is based on some truth.

Calvinism affirms Chriat died for the Church (for His Sheep). What Calvinism essentially denies is that Christ is the Propitiation for not only our sins but the sins of the World (it does this by redefining "World" and using it un such a way it is not used in the surrounding passages).

Calvinistic Limited Atonement also denies that the Cross was God reconciling man to Himself, and then we have the ministry of reconciliation urging men to be reconciled to God (it does this, again, by redefining Scripture and twisting it to meet Reformed theology).

Calvinism also uses the word "atonement" to as the ANE pagan sacrifice system rather than the biblical word "reconciliation".

Probably the most obvious error of Calvinistic Limited Atonement is denying that man is reconciled to God through Christ's death and men through His Life.

The errors that I see in Calvinism and their redefining of words is something that I have pointed out many times to many people. They seem more concerned about supporting the doctrines of Calvinism than those of the bible.

 

[AustinC]

Limited Atonement is wrong (in terms of Calvinism), but it is based on some truth.

Calvinism affirms Chriat died for the Church (for His Sheep). What Calvinism essentially denies is that Christ is the Propitiation for not only our sins but the sins of the World (it does this by redefining "World" and using it un such a way it is not used in the surrounding passages).

Calvinistic Limited Atonement also denies that the Cross was God reconciling man to Himself, and then we have the ministry of reconciliation urging men to be reconciled to God (it does this, again, by redefining Scripture and twisting it to meet Reformed theology).

Calvinism also uses the word "atonement" to as the ANE pagan sacrifice system rather than the biblical word "reconciliation".

Probably the most obvious error of Calvinistic Limited Atonement is denying that man is reconciled to God through Christ's death and men through His Life.

This comes off as an asserted opinion. Do you have documentation?