The Extent of the Atonement

[Yeshua1]

How do you deal with 1 John 2:2?

The value/worth of his death could have saved all, but the intent/application of it was just meant for the Elect...

 

[Tom Butler]

How do you deal with 1 John 2:2?

Here's the verse:

and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

The question turns on the definition of world. Does it mean all men without exception? I believe it refers to people from all tribes. nations and languages; to drive home the point that Jesus died for Gentiles as well as Jews.

Otherwise, we have some problems.

It would mean God sends to Hell some whom he loved with the greatest love.

It would mean that Jesus' sacrifice was not sufficient and did not satisfy God's justice. But we know from Isaiah 53:11 that God
"shall see the travail of his soul, AND BE SATISFIED. Either Jesus death satisfies or it doesn't.

We also have to deal with II Corinthians 5:19

God was in Christ reconciling THE WORLD unto himself, NOT IMPUTING their trespasses to them

Here, we have a couple of interpretation options:
1, Christ has reconciled every man without exception, and will not impute their sins to them. That would be Universalism, seems to me.
2. Christ, in His death, took upon himself the sins of those for whom he died, imputing their sins to Himself, and not to the objects of his reconciliation.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

How do you deal with 1 John 2:2?

Here's the verse:


The question turns on the definition of world. Does it mean all men without exception? I believe it refers to people from all tribes. nations and languages; to drive home the point that Jesus died for Gentiles as well as Jews.

Otherwise, we have some problems.

It would mean God sends to Hell some whom he loved with the greatest love.

It would mean that Jesus' sacrifice was not sufficient and did not satisfy God's justice. But we know from Isaiah 53:11 that God
"shall see the travail of his soul, AND BE SATISFIED. Either Jesus death satisfies or it doesn't.

We also have to deal with II Corinthians 5:19


Here, we have a couple of interpretation options:
1, Christ has reconciled every man without exception, and will not impute their sins to them. That would be Universalism, seems to me.
2. Christ, in His death, took upon himself the sins of those for whom he died, imputing their sins to Himself, and not to the objects of his reconciliation.

1John 2:2 as literal as I could …
“He Himself is The Propitiation concerning the sins of us : not only is He Himself The Propitiation concerning our _sins_ only, but He Himself indeed concerning the whole world / kosmos / _creation_, is The Propitiation.”
“For God so loved the KOSMOS / CREATION / WORLD that He gave his only begotten Son.”

Which means through having provided The Propitiation for our SINS – Jesus Christ the Lamb of God – , God in fact saved all his CREATION.

I basically agree with you; but see the OBVIOUS and AT HAND explanation of the text in ITSELF.

 

[Tom Butler]

So, GE, are you saying that the key to understanding the passage is the right translation of kosmos?

 

[The Biblicist]

So, GE, are you saying that the key to understanding the passage is the right translation of kosmos?

There is another interpretation. This interpretation is inclusive of both a universal and limited redemption. The universal aspect is that Jesus as the Second Adam purchased the entire creation including the non-elect (2 Pet. 2:1) obtaining the right to do with it as He pleases. This is purchasing the title deed of all creation, the whole world as His rightful inheritance to do with it as he pleases. The second aspect is redemptive in accordance with the everlasting covenant of redemption in regard to the elect. Thus all are equally redeemed when it comes to the purchased possession giving Him the legal right of inheritance to save or judge. However, in regard to eternal salvation only the elect are redeemed. Thus he died for the whole world in the sense of redemptive purchase as his rightful inheritance - ownership as the Second Adam. The right to save or judge belongs to Him alone by universal purchase. The determination to save is according to the eternal purpose of election. Hence, the whole world, the entire creation was obtained by purchase and He died for all equally in that sense but especially for the elect according to His eternal purpose of salvation.

As a man he regained what Adam lost - the rightful ruler over all the world. This gave him as a man, the legal right to be the judge over all the world as he purchased the title deed by his death (Rev. 5). Hence, he can do with SINNERS as he wills and ALL are sinners. He purchased that right and bought them (2 Pet. 2:1). Hence, he died for the whole world in the sense of purchased possession becoming the legal heir and owner of the purchased possession. He reconciled the world unto himself by his own blood to judge or save according to the eternal covenant of redemption.

What do you do with this theory? What aspects are correct or incorrect?

 

[Tom Butler]

I don't know what to do with the theory. It triggers more questions for me.

One, why would Jesus have to die in order to acquire the "title deed?" He's the Creator of the universe. He already owns it. He already has the right to judge over all the world.

Seems to me it's an attempt to bridge the gap between Particular Redemption and Unlimited Atonement. I'm not sure the gap can be bridged.

 

[The Biblicist]

I don't know what to do with the theory. It triggers more questions for me.

One, why would Jesus have to die in order to acquire the "title deed?" He's the Creator of the universe. He already owns it. He already has the right to judge over all the world.

Seems to me it's an attempt to bridge the gap between Particular Redemption and Unlimited Atonement. I'm not sure the gap can be bridged.

As God he owned all the creation. However, God gave Adam the rule over this earth and Adam forfeited it unto Satan. Christ as the Second Adam, as a man (not as God) regained what Adam lost through his redemption. Hence, the Second Adam regained the title deed to this earth as his inheritance. Hence, he purchased all rights forfeited by the first Adam by his redemption and defeat of Satan, sin, death and hell.

I think that is the imaginery in Revelation 5 and who is worthy to take the book and open it. He is not being considered as God but as "the lamb" who purchased that title deed. Hence, there is a general redemption of this earth and all mankind as his rightful inheritance to do with it as He wills. In this sense even the reprobate have been redeemed by him (2 Pet. 2:1). In this sense, he has reconciled the world to himself not imputing the adamic sin to anyone in regard to final judgement. Instead, every man is judged according to HIS OWN WORKS. However, what he wills in regard to the covenant of redemption is to save the elect and judge the rest of mankind.

 

[Yeshua1]

As God he owned all the creation. However, God gave Adam the rule over this earth and Adam forfeited it unto Satan. Christ as the Second Adam, as a man (not as God) regained what Adam lost through his redemption. Hence, the Second Adam regained the title deed to this earth as his inheritance. Hence, he purchased all rights forfeited by the first Adam by his redemption and defeat of Satan, sin, death and hell.

I think that is the imaginery in Revelation 5 and who is worthy to take the book and open it. He is not being considered as God but as "the lamb" who purchased that title deed. Hence, there is a general redemption of this earth and all mankind as his rightful inheritance to do with it as He wills. In this sense even the reprobate have been redeemed by him (2 Pet. 2:1). In this sense, he has reconciled the world to himself not imputing the adamic sin to anyone in regard to final judgement. Instead, every man is judged according to HIS OWN WORKS. However, what he wills in regard to the covenant of redemption is to save the elect and judge the rest of mankind.

Think that theory is way too speculative, as it seems to be what word of faith heretics teach concerning satan having to get paid for owning the lein upon the earth!

Think the biblical truth here is that god ALWAYS kept title to the earth, but than man fiofeited away his right to stay in a relationship with god, and the cross provided means to have mankingd get back to god in a spiritual relationship again!

 

[Tom Butler]

Back to the extent of the atonement.

Isaiah 53:11 He shall see the travail of his soul and be satisfied.

To me, satisfied means satisfied. Not, satisfied for all but applied to some. God requires no further payment.

So, it comes down to the question, for whom is satisfaction made? Certainly, the elect. What about everybody else? The answer seems obvious to me?

Then, there is the scripture quoted in an earlier post, II Corinthians 5:19

God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, NOT IMPUTING their trespasses to them

If world means everybody, and not imputing means not imputing to everybody, isn't that universalism? And isn't everbody reconciled?

So, if Christ's travail satisfies and reconciles, and sins are not imputed, we have universal salvation. If not, don't we have a travail that doesn't satisfy?

Or, we have a satisfaction, a reconciliation, and an imputation for those for whom it is meant. And not for those for whom it is not.

 

[The Biblicist]

Back to the extent of the atonement.

Isaiah 53:11 He shall see the travail of his soul and be satisfied.

To me, satisfied means satisfied. Not, satisfied for all but applied to some. God requires no further payment.

So, it comes down to the question, for whom is satisfaction made? Certainly, the elect. What about everybody else? The answer seems obvious to me?

Then, there is the scripture quoted in an earlier post, II Corinthians 5:19


If world means everybody, and not imputing means not imputing to everybody, isn't that universalism? And isn't everbody reconciled?

So, if Christ's travail satisfies and reconciles, and sins are not imputed, we have universal salvation. If not, don't we have a travail that doesn't satisfy?

Or, we have a satisfaction, a reconciliation, and an imputation for those for whom it is meant. And not for those for whom it is not.

Yes, it seems better to understand the term "world" in 2 Cor. 5:19 to mean "all classes, all races, all genders" or all without distinction rather than all without exception.

However, Christ did reclaim the title deed for man that Adam forfeited just as he satisfied all the terms of all the conditional covenants God made with man and obtained all the promises.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes, it seems better to understand the term "world" in 2 Cor. 5:19 to mean "all classes, all races, all genders" or all without distinction rather than all without exception.

However, Christ did reclaim the title deed for man that Adam forfeited just as he satisfied all the terms of all the conditional covenants God made with man and obtained all the promises.

God thought kept ownership, and its to the Father ALONE that the sin debt was obligated to be paid for!

WHAT verse hints that satan received title deed to man or earth from the Fall though?

 

[Yeshua1]

Back to the extent of the atonement.

Isaiah 53:11 He shall see the travail of his soul and be satisfied.

To me, satisfied means satisfied. Not, satisfied for all but applied to some. God requires no further payment.

So, it comes down to the question, for whom is satisfaction made? Certainly, the elect. What about everybody else? The answer seems obvious to me?

Then, there is the scripture quoted in an earlier post, II Corinthians 5:19


If world means everybody, and not imputing means not imputing to everybody, isn't that universalism? And isn't everbody reconciled?

So, if Christ's travail satisfies and reconciles, and sins are not imputed, we have universal salvation. If not, don't we have a travail that doesn't satisfy?

Or, we have a satisfaction, a reconciliation, and an imputation for those for whom it is meant. And not for those for whom it is not.

the extent of the salvation of the Cross would be to the persons receiving its benefit, the elect chosen by the Father in Christ!

 

[OldRegular]

As God he owned all the creation. However, God gave Adam the rule over this earth and Adam forfeited it unto Satan. Christ as the Second Adam, as a man (not as God) regained what Adam lost through his redemption. Hence, the Second Adam regained the title deed to this earth as his inheritance. Hence, he purchased all rights forfeited by the first Adam by his redemption and defeat of Satan, sin, death and hell.

I think that is the imaginery in Revelation 5 and who is worthy to take the book and open it. He is not being considered as God but as "the lamb" who purchased that title deed. Hence, there is a general redemption of this earth and all mankind as his rightful inheritance to do with it as He wills. In this sense even the reprobate have been redeemed by him (2 Pet. 2:1). In this sense, he has reconciled the world to himself not imputing the adamic sin to anyone in regard to final judgement. Instead, every man is judged according to HIS OWN WORKS. However, what he wills in regard to the covenant of redemption is to save the elect and judge the rest of mankind.

I have heard that explanation of the Scroll in Revelation 5 by some dispensationalists but I don't accept it.

 

[Yeshua1]

I have heard that explanation of the Scroll in Revelation 5 by some dispensationalists but I don't accept it.

I tend to see that being the One able and worthy to undo the Curse and pay the father the debt obligated Him by sinners!