Featured The Limited Atonement

13“But go and learn what this means: ‘I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT SACRIFICE,’ for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”


6For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.




Keep in mind if you think wrath was poured out on Jesus. That is PAID not FORGIVEN. IE. God Forgives no one.

 

Yes, that seems logical. The problem is, some passages seem to say otherwise. John talked about a universal propitiation.

1John 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.​

So in what sense is Christ the propitiation for the whole world?

And if you really want to be confused, digest this one:

2Pet. 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.​

In what sense are false prophets purchased by the Lord? Not saying I have a perfect answer, just that these texts seem to suggest some problems with limited atonement.

 

I understand. That means there is one sin that is not atoned for. The sin of rejection (making God to be a liar).
Irresistible or not irresistible, you are saying that God's atonement is not universal/unlimited. You either agree with limited atonement or you declare that there is a sin for which the atonement is not effective. Which is it?

 

I understand universalism to be that all persons will eventually be saved. I'm not an expert in all areas of calvinism but don't calvinists believe that only those predestined to eternal life will be saved?

 

Unlimited/Universal atonement, yet not really. Sin somehow is not atoned for, despite the claim that the atonement is universal.
Perhaps universal doesn't mean all. Perhaps unlimited doesn't mean all. Maybe all means almost all, but not quite all.
Tell me about these "views" that contradict themselves.

 

"That means there is one sin that is not atoned for" All sins handled by Jesus Christ.

It is not limited atonement. If his rejection means he is not being atoned for, Then he is telling THE TRUTH.

You either AGREE with the Non-believer. Or indeed he is a Liar.


Non-believer = I DO NOT BELIEVE "that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son."

Do you believe a non-believer is correct or not? Is he not telling the truth?

 

Mate, I know very religious unsaved people who believe God gives eternal life through His Son. They happen to believe that eternal life is not through the Son alone.

 

If his rejection is not paid for then sin is not fully atoned. The sin of rejection is left unatoned for and thus the sinner dies in his sins.

In that case the atonement is limited only to those who accept Christ.

Utilyan, there can only be limited atonement or universal salvation for all who have been atoned.

Otherwise unlimited atonement is a false label.

 

Never heard of that. I have heard folks just flat out reject.

John 14
6Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

Acts 4
12“And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.”

 

May I suggest that the atonement was not a singular but multiple presentations in the OT picture all performed by the Christ at the crucifixion.

Where the atonement day had multiple sacrifices, clothing changes, ... the whole of all the pictures recorded as a the day of atonement was wrapped up in the garden, crucifixion, and resurrection.

Because most take a narrow slice and present, they may indeed be limiting what is not.

It is my opinion, and I think Scriptures teach, that the blood shed was for all “in the land.”

Because God own the land and seas, it was for all creation.

However, Paul makes it abundantly clear, and so did the Christ, that the death and resurrection benefit only the believer.

Therefore, the atonement is limited, not by the insufficient supply of blood, for reconciliation is offered to every person. Rather, the atonement is limited by God in exactly who benefits from the death and resurrection. It s His choice for His purpose.

Where the Scriptures do specify that the resurrection and death are specific to believers, the Scripture do not place such limit upon the blood.

This is further represented in the OT day of atonement where regardless of belief the blood was sprinkled. Yet, only those who believed resided in paradise.

 

"In that case the atonement is limited only to those who accept Christ."
Right so he is telling the TRUTH. Square Peg meet Round Hole.

He can't be rejecting if it was never offered to him. IE.... He is telling the truth.

His claim is Jesus is not atoning for him. Your claim is Jesus did not atone for him. There is no sin he is telling the truth.

The exact claim you make on the reprobate is the same he makes himself and is getting him in trouble.


Do you agree with the reprobate? I DO NOT BELIEVE "that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son."

You are correct MR reprobate, He did not offer you eternal life. You have spoken the TRUTH.


OR

You are WRONG Mr. reprobate, He did offer you eternal life and this life is in his son., You are a Liar.

 

All sin paid for.

Limit of belief dependent upon the direct purposed work of God.

Folks need to be careful to remember the day of atonement was not a single act, but multiple pictures presented.

It would be a mistake to consider atonement unlimited.

 

It doesn't matter what a human declares. Either the blood of Christ atones for all sin or it doesn't. Unlimited or limited.

 

Doesn’t the reformed view lump the blood, death and resurrection into the single structure of limited atonement?

 

Scripture states it matters and its on GOD's Declaration.

10The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son.

11And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.


The unbeliever does not believe-->God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.

Has he spoken the TRUTH or Does he make God a Liar? The forgiveness is right there being offered, the unbeliever does not accept it.

This is real easy question to answer. Is the unbeliever telling the TRUTH or NOT? Yes or No?

 

Your position seems to be limited by atonement, even though I am sure you think differently.

I find it interesting to see twisting and redefinition of atonement so that it isn't really atonement at all. To me it's just humans trying to control God and get the upper hand.