Wider Discussion of Limited Atonement

[skypair]

On General Discussions...

... the convo isn't getting as much attention as it might here.

I have come to somewhat of a reconciliation with Calvinism on the issue, however. I hope this will bring us all to some "unity in the knowledge and faith of Christ" as we continue to try to "come ... unto a perfect man." (Eph 4:13)

Summarily, we ought to distinguish between the 'all sin forgiven' aspect of Christ's work and the 'reconciliation' aspect of Christ's work.

Propitiation means to turn away wrath, appease. Because they believed in the coming Messiah, the OT saints didn't go to the lower portion of sheol when they died but went to the "Abraham's bosom" portion. They were still separated from God. And what those in the lower portion experienced was, arguably, NOT God's wrath on acount of sin but the darkness, thirst, fire, separation, and dying of their own making. In propitiation then, Christ is seen as paying for ALL sin.

Atonement and expiation mean to bring together, reconcile. Because Christ had died, He was able to bring the OT saints to HEAVEN with Him - to reconcile God and man. So atonement IS limited to those who believe.

Do you see that propitiation is directed toward all but atonement only to believers? I think Calvies and free willers can get to common ground from here, don't you? In fact, Christ DID "do it all" so far as propitiation for ALL sin for ALL mankind is concerned! What He can't do by Himself is reconcile the sinner to God. Dr Bob ought to be pleased to see that I agree with him for once! Now we just have to discuss how to receive the atoning work of Christ!

skypair

 

[jcjordan]

I'm no perfect theologian, but according to my undestanding, I think your a little mixed up. Dr. Bob or Rippon or someone else may need to correct me, but I belive that both propitiation and expiation are both aspects of the atonement. I'm heading out to hike on the Appalachian Trail for a few days, so I won't be in on this discussion for a while, but this should get things started.

 

[doulous]

WHAT the terms mean is not in question, their scope is. I appreciate the intent of trying to find common ground between Arminians and Calvinists, but it's not going to be found on the scope of the atonement. Aren't the same arguments old and tired in here?

Arminians: Christ died for all.

Calvinist: Christ died for the elect.

Doesn't that about sum it up?

I think we should let our differences stand.

 

[skypair]

WHAT the terms mean is not in question, their scope is. I appreciate the intent of trying to find common ground between Arminians and Calvinists, but it's not going to be found on the scope of the atonement. Aren't the same arguments old and tired in here?

Arminians: Christ died for all.

Calvinist: Christ died for the elect.

Doesn't that about sum it up?

I think we should let our differences stand.

No, it really doesn't. Here's why: In the OT, there was a sacrifice for the feast of ATONEMENT consisting of 2 goats. One was the atonement goat. It was slain and it's blood/life taken to the mercy seat. This goat represents YOU -- repentant, confessing, and then being confessed before God (Rom 10:9-10, Mt 10:32).

The other goat was the propitiation goat. The sins were "put on" that goat and sent out into the wilderness. This showed how salvation worked on an individual basis. ("Goats," BTW, represent the "lost," Mt 25:31-46)

However, in the Feast of Passover that preceded the atonement annually, the "unbleminshed lamb" was sacrificed for the sin of EVERYONE who called themselves "Israel." This conforms with Christ's sacrificial propitiation "not for our sins only but for the sins of the world." (John 1:29, 1John 2:2)

Do you see the difference? Even though Christ died for the propitiation of everyone's sin, each individual has to bring his own sacrifice to the altar for atonement before God.

It could just be that the "L" is the ONLY thing we should agree with the Calvinists on! :laugh:

skypair

 

[skypair]

This topic...

... seemed to do better on the other board, so

That is pretty good skypair. What Calvinists say is that "The atonement was SUFFICIENT to save everyone but EFFICIENT only for the elect."

How do we receive it? By grace (the unmerited love and favor of God) through faith (saving belief) and that (faith) is not self generated, but is the "gift" of God,not of works, lest anyone boast. In other words we are born "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God"

You got it pretty good yourself. Yes, forgiveness is all grace. And yes, faith is not self-generated but is a gift. But it is the gift for "laying hold of atonement" -- for BELIEVING and repenting.

Remember, MoG, there is a difference even between the feasts that are represented here. Grace and forgiveness of sins was celebrated by the feast of Passover where all were forgiven. But atonement was another, later feast. It is celebrated after the feast of "calling" (feast of trumpets). It called for the "goat" to die -- the lost sinner -- for his life (blood) to be given to God and his sins sent far away from him on the "scapegoat," Christ. Else how does Christ become your "substitute?"

Having celebrated the feast of atonement, the next feast was tabernacles -- God dwelling with you -- well, IN you.

Do you see my explanation better now? You have received grace -- everyone has. But believing this also calls for you to lay hold of the recociliation that is offered by grace, to lay hold of salvation.

We could actually look at it this way as well: In the Passover, Israel was all forgiven. They celebrated the other feast which showed them how to apply salvation to themselves. There will actually be a time future (trib) when they will celebrate Pentecost in Christ as the church did in 33 AD. Shortly afterwards the OT saints will be "trumpeted" out of their graves, receive the atonement and live with, tabernacle with, Christ for 1000 years. But for us, the feasts tell us what we need to do in this lifetime.

skypair

 

[doulous]

No, it really doesn't. Here's why: In the OT, there was a sacrifice for the feast of ATONEMENT consisting of 2 goats. One was the atonement goat. It was slain and it's blood/life taken to the mercy seat. This goat represents YOU -- repentant, confessing, and then being confessed before God (Rom 10:9-10, Mt 10:32).

The other goat was the propitiation goat. The sins were "put on" that goat and sent out into the wilderness. This showed how salvation worked on an individual basis. ("Goats," BTW, represent the "lost," Mt 25:31-46)

However, in the Feast of Passover that preceded the atonement annually, the "unbleminshed lamb" was sacrificed for the sin of EVERYONE who called themselves "Israel." This conforms with Christ's sacrificial propitiation "not for our sins only but for the sins of the world." (John 1:29, 1John 2:2)

Do you see the difference? Even though Christ died for the propitiation of everyone's sin, each individual has to bring his own sacrifice to the altar for atonement before God.

It could just be that the "L" is the ONLY thing we should agree with the Calvinists on! :laugh:

skypair

You're missing a major part of equation. Was everyone in Israel saved? Where they all spiritual children of Abraham? Was it possible to be part of the covenant and still be a child or the devil? Yom Kippur atoned for the sins of the nation, not the individual. Salvation has always been on the basis of grace through faith.

Jesus understood the dichotomy between being a physical descendant and a spiritual descendant (John 3:6).

So no, Calvinists and Arminians do not agree on particular atonement.

 

[skypair]

You're missing a major part of equation. Was everyone in Israel saved? Where they all spiritual children of Abraham? Was it possible to be part of the covenant and still be a child or the devil? Yom Kippur atoned for the sins of the nation, not the individual. Salvation has always been on the basis of grace through faith.

Jesus understood the dichotomy between being a physical descendant and a spiritual descendant (John 3:6).

So no, Calvinists and Arminians do not agree on particular atonement.

OK, let's test your assertions.

1) At a very minimum, you are saying there were 2 sacrifices for the very same thing -- that propitiation and atonement are indistinguishable in function and application. That there is no significance to goats vs lambs.

2) On the Day of Atonement -- just so you get this -- the high priest presented a bullock for his own sins (not necessary for Jesus). The 2 goats were presented by the congregation (IMO unsaved but believing). Then the priest took the blood in to the mercy seat and sprinkled the seat once and the ground beneath 7 times (possibly prefiguring, the 7 churches of Rev 2-3 but I'm open to input on this). Then the priest came out, laid his hands on the "scapegoat," and sent the scapegoat out into the wilderness by a "fit man who left him there" (prefiguring, I believe, how all believers are to "wash one another's feet" of the sin of this world). Then he returned to the tabernacle and washed himself and put on his "garments of glory and beauty" and came out (signifying, I believe, our death or rapture to Christ and return with Him). Then the bodies of the bullock and sacrificial goat were burned outside the city (Isa 66:21).

3) Goats definitely correspond to evil, Mt 25. You dare not put your own "spin" on something that significant to the understanding of scripture!

skypair