Theory of atonement, do you have one?

[agedman]

God intended the death of Jesus to atone for just His elect....

You keep harping on this type of statement, but so far it lacks support.

Now, that doesn't mean that a theory is necessarily wrong.

But, what provides the most Scriptural support should be considered as the most secure to the truth.

So far, a limited atonement for only the elect is terribly weak.

Better is admitting that the Blood shed was for all, and that the redemption resides completely in the prerogative of the Father.

At least that way there is the greatest amount of Scripture support, it violates no Scripture, and it is faithful to both the OT type and NT fulfillment.

 

[Yeshua1]

You keep harping on this type of statement, but so far it lacks support.

Now, that doesn't mean that a theory is necessarily wrong.

But, what provides the most Scriptural support should be considered as the most secure to the truth.

So far, a limited atonement for only the elect is terribly weak.

Better is admitting that the Blood shed was for all, and that the redemption resides completely in the prerogative of the Father.

At least that way there is the greatest amount of Scripture support, it violates no Scripture, and it is faithful to both the OT type and NT fulfillment.

Jesus is the High priest for them who believe, His elect, correct?

 

[agedman]

Jesus is the High priest for them who believe, His elect, correct?

He is the first fruits, the Groom, the High Priest, the good Shepherd, the Alpha and Omega...

Such are not statements to be taken lightly.

Now as Christ being the High Priest, what would you desire to share?

Are the elect not also priests?

Are you about to contend that the OT blood only covered the priests?

 

[Yeshua1]

He is the first fruits, the Groom, the High Priest, the good Shepherd, the Alpha and Omega...

Such are not statements to be taken lightly.

Now as Christ being the High Priest, what would you desire to share?

Are the elect not also priests?

Are you about to contend that the OT blood only covered the priests?

Nope, but did cover for just the redeemed!

 

[agedman]

Nope, but did cover for just the redeemed!

How do you know?

Were all Jews, slaves, foreigners, automatically redeemed irregardless of belief?

 

[JonC]

This is like the kettle calling the pot black(lol).

Yes, you have identified a sin we have both indulged at times - ultimately one of arrogance and pride - and I am pleased that you are able to at least identify this in yourself (it is important that we know ourselves). My concern is that you take one context axiomatic when it is superimposed, but this kettle is unwilling to discuss it with the pot until we are on friendlier ground.

 

[agedman]

I have been doing a quick search for online information about the stranger and sojourner as it relates to the OT interaction in Israel.

So far, I think this one of the better that I have seen. Perhaps it will guide some into understanding the portrayal of the Cross in the Old Testament. Then maybe not.

From Sword Searcher: Stranger and Sojourner (in the Old Testament) in the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.