World or elect

Just to continue along this line of thinking for a bit, would then you regard teaching of the Jewish leaders of Christ’s day trustworthy?

What of the many “scholars” of note who although may hold high degrees in the study and learning of God’s word, yet are accounted as heretical, trustworthy?


It is very true “wisdom comes from God,” however, it is not automatic that those who study and learn God’s Word have the wisdom from God.

There is a difference between wisdom and knowledge.

Learning and studying may gain great knowledge, but Godly wisdom is from God, unlike earthy human wisdom.

 

The basic problem resides in that thinking of Christ’s death being the saving when it is not. It is belief that is the compelling factor of salvation.

It is unfortunate that reformed thinking has driven people to enjoin to a thinking that is just not found in Scriptures.

It is just as bad a theology as the statement, “Christ purchased our faith.” Totally not Scriptural, yet I have heard it, often.

 

Actually, you didn’t.

You presented your opinion, but the Scriptures did not support your opinion.

The atonement sacrifice was for all in the land, excluding..... none.

 

One word.

Belief.

That which the God of all creation grants. Not by the will of man, but totally by His authority and purpose.

That is the Scriptural limit of the atonement, not the blood.

Not a single Scripture limits the blood to the elect.

 

Do you suppose Christ was wrong in saying, “And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.”

Ok, I know, wise is actually shrewd, as many versions translate it to be.

Teasing aside,
I do think there is human worldly wisdom, for even Paul mentions such wisdom as God making it foolish, but it nevertheless is a wisdom. Indeed the 1 Corinthians mentions wisdom of this world in a few places, including:

“Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?”

5so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.
6Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away.
​

Therefore, it is acceptable to express that which the Scriptures support, that there is a wisdom of humanity, of the world. Just as fallen and dead as any unbeliever. But nevertheless a wisdom.

 

1) Neither verse uses the word “world” so it is quite a leap to assume the blood is limited from them when other verses which DO include “world” actually does state the blood was for ALL ungodly.

2) The redeemed are redeemed because God chose them to be redeemed. God selected for redemption all that He desired, He willed to believe. It is a separate and particular act on God’s part.

Therefore, THAT is why those verses are valid and reliable.

 

That is the point!

Not a single Scripture that uses “world” as indicating a select few as the subset of the whole.

 

It is simple, Aaron, give an account of the Scripture stating the blood was NOT for all the world.

It should be easy to find out of one of the thirty-six or more times the NT uses the word.

But, ultimately, one either believes the Scripture or clings to a human scheme.

The Scripture uses the word “world” (meaning every human that has, is, and ever will live) as having the blood applied.

This is not MY scheme, it is the Scripture.

This is truly sad, Aaron.

For in this you are actually nullifying both the grace and the faith God grants that one believe.

How could Paul preach reconciliation to every person if reconciliation was limited by a lack of blood?

Certainly, that very important subject would dominate some portion of his writing?

What of John? He was eye witness to the whole crucifixion, standing with the very mother of Jesus at the foot of the cross. If ever one would, just from human desire of seeing evil people get their just desserts, it would be this one.

Yet, he was compelled to include the whole of all humanity in a specific statement about the actual blood of Christ.

Salvation resides in one word.

Belief.

The whole of Romans would point to that single word.

The focus of John is actually upon that single word.

Perhaps in your exuberant desire, you forget that the picture of the one worthy is that of the slain Lamb.

That Lamb was given glory and honor of all heaven, not by the law.

Christ came to fulfill the law, not be judged by it.

We as believers are not judged by the law, because, in Christ, we cannot be judged, but stand as uncondemned.

Why?

Because those that believe are saved (Romans), and those that do not believe are condemned (John).

It is not the lack of blood, it is the lack of belief.

Oh, but this is just not consistent with the single necessary to be saved.

The Christ is not sacrificed for each believer, but once for all.

Therefore, it remains no longer of law condemning, but of unbelief.

The Judaizers would cling to the law, and attempt to conform Christ to the law.

However, humankind is no longer brought by law to seek redemption. For does not Paul clearly state to the Ephesians that it is by The unmerited favor of God granting the gift of faith that one is redeemed, not by “works of righteousness (the law)?”

How then can the law serve as other than a school teacher, pointing out the Christ?