Jesus Christ, died for all

[MennoSota]

No one here debates that. But where does it say for 'ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY, JUST the faithful?" That's the debate.

No, that's not the debate at all.
The debate is whether Jesus atoning sacrifice effectively makes all humans holy, righteous and perfect or whether Jesus atoning sacrifice effectively makes only those whom God has chosen holy, righteous and perfect.
You are debating with yourself and everyone keeps telling you, but you ignore them.

So, the issue is NOT that the Bible is wrong about Christ dying for everyone, the issue is the Bible is RIGHT about God gives faith to some. Not all are justified because not all have faith; that is the orthodox, traditional Christian view.

The issue is that the Bible never says Jesus atoned for all humanities sins as you claim. You have shared verses that both atpollard and I have shown are not teaching what you claim they teach. You are simply ill informed, Josiah.
Second, you keep bringing in justification when we are talking atonement. I believe this is because, like Luther, you can't grasp atonement as a legal requirement before one can be justified.

Of course, not everyone is justified (universalism is an outgrowth of radical Calvinism)... but this is NOT because Christ is not the Savior, NOT because God wants most to fry in hell and so causes most to go there, NOT because Christ died for only some (and likely not you or me)- it's because not all have faith and therefore don't benefit from what Christ DID (not suffer because Christ did NOT).

This is a perfect example of how you keep talking about justification when we are specifically talking about atonement. Do you even know what atonement is? Perhaps you have been arguing from ignorance from the beginning and simply can't differentiate between atonement and justification. Josiah, do you have a clue about atonement?

But it never remotely says God desires most to fry in hell and thus causes that.... and it never says that Jesus ONLY died for a few (and odds are, that doesn't include you or me).

No one has ever, even remotely, said that God desires most to fry in hell or that God causes humans to fry in hell. That is your ignorance talking and nothing else.
Again, does God condemn those whom Jesus has fully atoned for their sins? Based upon your comments, I have to conclude that you are saying..."YES."

But how does that prove that God hates most people.... desires most to fry etnerally in hell and thus causes them to go there.... that Christ died ONLY for a limited few (and odds are, not you or me)?

This is your false narrative that NO ONE has ever stated. Do you lie to yourself often?
Again, does God condemn those whom Jesus has fully atoned for their sins? Based upon your comments, I have to conclude that you are saying..."YES."

And where is the verse that states God desires most to go to hell?

There is no verse. But no one has ever claimed such a thing. You have a fantasy going on in your head that no one else has.

That God causes most to go to hell?

No one. This is your fantasy.

That Christ died for ONLY a few?

Again, does God condemn those whom Jesus has fully atoned for their sins? Based upon you comments, I have to conclude that you are saying "YES."
We believe that Christ died for ALL the ELECT.

 

[Andrew]

No, that's not the debate at all.
The debate is whether Jesus atoning sacrifice effectively makes all humans holy, righteous and perfect or whether Jesus atoning sacrifice effectively makes only those whom God has chosen holy, righteous and perfect.
You are debating with yourself and everyone keeps telling you, but you ignore them.


The issue is that the Bible never says Jesus atoned for all humanities sins as you claim. You have shared verses that both atpollard and I have shown are not teaching what you claim they teach. You are simply ill informed, Josiah.
Second, you keep bringing in justification when we are talking atonement. I believe this is because, like Luther, you can't grasp atonement as a legal requirement before one can be justified.


This is a perfect example of how you keep talking about justification when we are specifically talking about atonement. Do you even know what atonement is? Perhaps you have been arguing from ignorance from the beginning and simply can't differentiate between atonement and justification. Josiah, do you have a clue about atonement?



No one has ever, even remotely, said that God desires most to fry in hell or that God causes humans to fry in hell. That is your ignorance talking and nothing else.
Again, does God condemn those whom Jesus has fully atoned for their sins? Based upon your comments, I have to conclude that you are saying..."YES."


This is your false narrative that NO ONE has ever stated. Do you lie to yourself often?
Again, does God condemn those whom Jesus has fully atoned for their sins? Based upon your comments, I have to conclude that you are saying..."YES."


There is no verse. But no one has ever claimed such a thing. You have a fantasy going on in your head that no one else has.

No one. This is your fantasy.

Again, does God condemn those whom Jesus has fully atoned for their sins? Based upon you comments, I have to conclude that you are saying "YES."
We believe that Christ died for ALL the ELECT.

Should we have a topic on Atonement?
Seems that double predestination is a hot topic, my struggle is that if one believes in predestination (ephesians 1) than that ultimately affirms double predestination... I hate that word, it's not a biblical term but it is biblically implied likewise, according to Romans 9 we should not be discouraged of this truth and never ashamed that Christ is OUR Savior... what a pickle this all is.. like the many times we get ourselves in a pickle we start breaking down the structure and meaning of certain words...

I don't have a dictionary handy so google suggest that "Atonement" in Christian theology means "to reconcile" (to live in harmony)
God actually wills that all believers should live in harmony with not only other believers but with our enemies just as Christ so loved us.

 

[MennoSota]

Should we have a topic on Atonement?
Seems that double predestination is a hot topic, my struggle is that if one believes in predestination (ephesians 1) than that ultimately affirms double predestination... I hate that word, it's not a biblical term but it is biblically implied likewise, according to Romans 9 we should not be discouraged of this truth and never ashamed that Christ is OUR Savior... what a pickle this all is.. like the many times we get ourselves in a pickle we start breaking down the structure and meaning of certain words...

It seems that people imagine they are good. Therefore they hate God for reconciling people without all persons getting to pick whether they want God or reject God.
The fatal flaw is the horribly wrong thought that humans are good. Humans are not good. There is not one thing within humanity where God see's a holy and righteous person. God tells us that all our (self) righteousness is as filth rags. But, still...we humans harbor fantasies of being good...despite what God very plainly tells us.
So, since we ultimately think we're good, we bristle at the thought that God can just decide who remains hell bound and who will be saved from the hell bound path. We can't seem to be grateful or utterly amazed at God's gracious decision to save even one hell bound person. We think that the only fair thing is for God to just throw down the rope and we'll just climb up ourselves. Perhaps God will give us a boost every once in awhile, but ultimately we just do all the climbing and then when we get to heaven we'll thank God for the rope he threw down to us. The one's who rejected the rope are the only ones who are condemned because they just would try.

But...God says all our (self) righteousness is as filthy rags. Sin has utterly killed us in our attempt to climb out of the hell bound path. We cannot do so. In fact, we don't even try. Instead we give God the middle finger and march on in complete rebellion, thinking we are good enough and God will forgive us in the end. So, those who hear that God chooses whom He will save from the hell bound path...even while they are giving Him the middle finger...get upset because they think God is being unfair.

Ultimately, atonement isn't even an issue in their thinking. Why would it...they think they're good at the core of their being. Atonement isn't important. What they think is important is their faith that God loves them and forgives them. They think that such a faith will justify their corruption before God. They have no clue how important Jesus atoning sacrifice is. They don't realize that Jesus had to pay for their rebellious middle fingers toward God. They don't realize that Jesus took their punishment. They just go along thinking that faith is enough.

Thus, atonement is hard for them to grasp.

 

[Andrew]

It seems that people imagine they are good. Therefore they hate God for reconciling people without all persons getting to pick whether they want God or reject God.
The fatal flaw is the horribly wrong thought that humans are good. Humans are not good. There is not one thing within humanity where God see's a holy and righteous person. God tells us that all our (self) righteousness is as filth rags. But, still...we humans harbor fantasies of being good...despite what God very plainly tells us.
So, since we ultimately think we're good, we bristle at the thought that God can just decide who remains hell bound and who will be saved from the hell bound path. We can't seem to be grateful or utterly amazed at God's gracious decision to save even one hell bound person. We think that the only fair thing is for God to just throw down the rope and we'll just climb up ourselves. Perhaps God will give us a boost every once in awhile, but ultimately we just do all the climbing and then when we get to heaven we'll thank God for the rope he threw down to us. The one's who rejected the rope are the only ones who are condemned because they just would try.

But...God says all our (self) righteousness is as filthy rags. Sin has utterly killed us in our attempt to climb out of the hell bound path. We cannot do so. In fact, we don't even try. Instead we give God the middle finger and march on in complete rebellion, thinking we are good enough and God will forgive us in the end. So, those who hear that God chooses whom He will save from the hell bound path...even while they are giving Him the middle finger...get upset because they think God is being unfair.

Ultimately, atonement isn't even an issue in their thinking. Why would it...they think they're good at the core of their being. Atonement isn't important. What they think is important is their faith that God loves them and forgives them. They think that such a faith will justify their corruption before God. They have no clue how important Jesus atoning sacrifice is. They don't realize that Jesus had to pay for their rebellious middle fingers toward God. They don't realize that Jesus took their punishment. They just go along thinking that faith is enough.

Thus, atonement is hard for them to grasp.

Limited Atonement = Predestination of the Elect = destination of the none elect = "predestination of the none Elect"(?!?)
(In agreement)
...

It's all starting to look like math equations that equal the same outcome to me..

Jeremiah seems to suggest that God created him to seek him before he was even born.

 

[Josiah]

No, that's not the debate at all.

You yourself specifically stated the "U" of TULIP is this: Christ died ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY, ONLY, JUST for the LIMITED few - the church, the elect.

Like every other radical, extreme Calvinist, you can't find a verse in the Bible that remotely says that...and you just ignore the MANY, MANY Scriptures that says the exact opposite of that, but you keep verbatim parroting the new tradition of one denomination on this nonetheless.

The issue is that the Bible never says Jesus atoned for all humanities sins as you claim.

Actually, the Bible over and over again says that Christ died for all. You just don't care. You just keep parroting the new denominational tradition of a tiny few latter-day radical, extreme Calvinists.

Again, does God condemn those whom Jesus has fully atoned for their sins? Based upon your comments, I have to conclude that you are saying..."YES."

Already address... over and over and over and over, by many. You won't accept it because you repudiate Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide, you repudiate any mention of faith.

We believe that Christ died for ALL the ELECT.

'We all know. You just can't find a single verse of Scripture that remotely says that.... you can't find anything about this ONLY the elect.... and you just ignore a HOST of MANY verses that says the exact opposite.

Yup, we all know that.





.




.

 

[MennoSota]

You yourself specifically stated the "U" of TULIP is this: Christ died ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY, ONLY, JUST for the LIMITED few - the church, the elect.

Like every other radical, extreme Calvinist, you can't find a verse in the Bible that remotely says that...and you just ignore the MANY, MANY Scriptures that says the exact opposite of that, but you keep verbatim parroting the new tradition of one denomination on this nonetheless.







Actually, the Bible over and over again says that Christ died for all. You just don't care. You just keep parroting the new denominational tradition of a tiny few latter-day radical, extreme Calvinists.







Already address... over and over and over and over, by many. You won't accept it because you repudiate Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide, you repudiate any mention of faith.





'We all know. You just can't find a single verse of Scripture that remotely says that.... you can't find anything about this ONLY the elect.... and you just ignore a HOST of MANY verses that says the exact opposite.

Yup, we all know that.





.




.

LOL
So, since you believe Christ atoned for all, but deny the atonement made humans holy and righteous before God. It is clear you believe the atonement is not needed for salvation.
All you need is faith that justifies you. Jesus died for no reason because the atoning sacrifice is meaningless. Only faith is important to you.
However, if you believe the atonement fully paid for sin and Jesus paid for all sin...then all are saved.

Again, how can God condemn those who have been made perfect by the atoning sacrifice of Christ Jesus.

Josiah, I beg you to answer that last question. So far you have spent MONTHS refusing to answer that question.

 

[Andrew]

https://youtu.be/_qiKUqY23JY

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

No one actually knows what ID2 actually said. Intentional obfuscation?

Anyone who can read and has a reasonable I.Q. can read and understand what I said. It's not Yiddish, it's English

 

[MennoSota]

Anyone who can read and has a reasonable I.Q. can read and understand what I said. It's not Yiddish, it's English

You don't even know what you're talking about. But, give it a try.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

You don't even know what you're talking about. But, give it a try.

You can read it for yourself. It's a few pages back, but by your standard I'll be forever a Universalist until I admit that God atoned for only a few. If that's what you'd like I can just say it and everyone will be happy. Will that satisfy you?

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

.

 

[MennoSota]

You can read it for yourself. It's a few pages back, but by your standard I'll be forever a Universalist until I admit that God atoned for only a few. If that's what you'd like I can just say it and everyone will be happy. Will that satisfy you?

I have read it. You don't know what you're talking about.
Perhaps you, like Josiah, just have no clue about what atonement actually does. Are you Lutheran? Maybe it's just the fatal flaw of Lutherans to be clueless about atonement.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

I have read it. You don't know what you're talking about.
Perhaps you, like Josiah, just have no clue about what atonement actually does. Are you Lutheran? Maybe it's just the fatal flaw of Lutherans to be clueless about atonement.

Yep. Must be. Sackcloth and ashes for me, man. No spittin' or gum chewin' neither

 

[MennoSota]

Yep. Must be. Sackcloth and ashes for me, man. No spittin' or gum chewin' neither

Keep avoiding if you wish.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

...Maybe it's just the fatal flaw of Lutherans to be clueless about atonement.

You know, there's a limit to just how much I'll... oh, wait...

 

[MennoSota]

You know, there's a limit to just how much I'll... oh, wait...

Doesn't surprise me if you get your understanding of atonement from Jethro Tull.

 

[Lamb]

Even Calvinists agree that the atonement doesn't automatically admit someone to heaven...they have to receive what God earned by grace through faith. Maybe Menno isn't quite Calvinist?

Lutherans believe that the atonement was for all man, just like Adam's fall affected all of man...Jesus reversed that. Yet, at our deaths, if we have faith we have salvation. If we don't have faith, then the atonement isn't applied to us, so no, forgiven men are not in hell.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Doesn't surprise me if you get your understanding of atonement from Jethro Tull.

I think what's truly "limited" here is understanding perpetuated by an unwillingness to see beyond our own face in a mirror. As long as we are comfortable with our own face (i.e. understanding), why rock the boat by examining the fact that we might actually look a bit haggard?

 

[MennoSota]

I think what's truly "limited" here is understanding perpetuated by an unwillingness to see beyond our own face in a mirror. As long as we are comfortable with our own face (i.e. understanding), why rock the boat by examining the fact that we might actually look a bit haggard?

ID2, just state your exact belief about atonement. Then tell me exactly what you think atonement is. That way, I can either agree with you or point out a difference in definition or a failure to take your thinking to its full conclusion.
Until then, you have simply been babbeling...

Sent from my moto g(6) play using Tapatalk

 

[Josiah]

where does it say for 'ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY, JUST the faithful?" That's the debate.


.

No, that's not the debate at all.

Well, not for you.

But YOU stated that the dogma of the "L" is "Jesus died only for the church." And every conservative Reformed website I can find fully agrees with you: that is the meaning, the teaching of the "L." And the two Reformed doctrine books I have state that the meaning, the teaching of the "L" is that Jesus died for ONLY the elect.

Everyone except for a tiny few extreme Calvinists for the last 400 or so years disagrees with that.

So that IS the debate of the "L".


Many of us have given you many Scriptures that clearly contradict this weird invention of a few latter-day radical Calvinists, this denomination tradition. You have had to delete all the words that prove you wrong and replace them with the opposite to avoid these. And you have been asked to present even one verse that states Jesus died ONLY for the few, the elect, the church ("ONLY" being the essential word since it IS the dogma) but you can't do it, no Calvinists in 400+ years has been able to do this (and we both know why, don't we?)

We believe that Christ died for ALL the ELECT.

We know. The "L" is that Jesus died ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY, JUST for the Elect... a few.

It is a denominational tradition invented in the late 16th Century by a tiny few latter-day radical Calvinists. It's just that the Bible teaches the opposite and as you've proven, no Calvinists in over 400 years has been able to find even one Scripture that states this, just a long list of Scriptures that teach the opposite.

YOU insist we MUST reject all denominational tradition and consider ONLY the words of Scripture.... but all you do is parrot a new denominational tradition, disregard all Scripture that teaches the opposite and don't seem to care if any Scripture actually teaches your denomination tradition.

No one has ever, even remotely, said that God desires most to fry in hell or that God causes humans to fry in hell.

Oh, I could quote many radical Calvinists that do... I recall one at CH who constantly noted that "God is equally glorified by those in heaven and those in hell." But let's move on...

Part of the "L" argument is that God does NOT desire most to repent, most to be justified, most to go to heaven..... This in spite of Scripture stating the exact opposite.

Again, does God condemn those whom Jesus has fully atoned for their sins? Based upon your comments, I have to conclude that you are saying..."YES."

AGAIN, this has been answered over and over and over and over.... but you dismiss anything that embraces faith. I will not delete faith, I will not repudiate Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide. And thus no response I give will be considered by you.

The position of historic, biblical Christianity is that Jesus died for everyone (as the Bible says).... and that faith apprehends/embraces/trusts/relies on such and via faith the individual benefits from His atoning work. NO, it is NOT simply a fact that Christ died for them IRREGARDLESS OF FAITH (your deleting of faith is what lead many radical TULIP Calvinists to universalism), I will not delete faith, I will not regard faith as irrelevant and meaningless and worthless, I will NOT delete Sola Fide from the biblical position.

Now, where is the verse that states that if Jesus died for everyone, thus everyone is saved REGARDLESS of whether they have faith or not.... or that some are not saved REGARDLESS of whether they have faith or not if Jesus didn't die for them? Your premise (as several have pointed out to you) is absurd, illogical and certianly unbiblical.




.