A Catholic perspective on Limited Atonement and Universal Atonement arguments.

[MoreCoffee]

Thanks. I'll add this to my notes. Just remember though, our main topic is how Jesus did not die for those who did not believe in John 10. And that was the reason they did not believe.

That may be your preferred topic but the topic of this thread is

A Catholic perspective on Limited Atonement and Universal Atonement arguments.​

 

[1689Dave]

That may be your preferred topic but the topic of this thread is

​

A Catholic perspective on Limited Atonement and Universal Atonement arguments.​

You can argue your church version unimpeded. I'll stick to scripture.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You can argue your version un impeded.

One is always bound by truth. No one can have Christ as Lord and at the same time invent a religion that Christ has not revealed and given to humanity himself. Such religions are always fundamentally opposed to truth. That is why those who follow them must redefine words in scripture so often; being unable to rest in the truth that Christ has revealed such persons strive and contend for their own beliefs by warping, distorting, and corrupting the truth which is revealed by Christ.

If time is taken and study is conducted with humility and a desire for truth then the words that are used in scripture are sufficient as they are. Yet, as the serpent did in Eden, religion makers deny what God has said by changing it.

"Why hath God commanded you," ... [and here the serpent offers a corruption of God's command] ... , "that you should not eat of every tree of paradise?"​

And so it goes with every innovation in religion and every error taught by men. So it is with God's words through the Baptist, "behold the lamb of God, behold he who takes away the sin of the world" , which becomes, in the hands of men who innovate in religion and create a new religion of their own, "behold the lamb of God, behold he who takes away the sin of the elect alone."

 

[1689Dave]

One is always bound by truth. No one can have Christ as Lord and at the same time invent a religion that Christ has not revealed and given to humanity himself. Such religions are always fundamentally opposed to truth. That is why those who follow them must redefine words in scripture so often; being unable to rest in the truth that Christ has revealed such persons strive and contend for their own beliefs by warping, distorting, and corrupting the truth which is revealed by Christ.

If time is taken and study is conducted with humility and a desire for truth then the words that are used in scripture are sufficient as they are. Yet, as the serpent did in Eden, religion makers follow the serpent's teaching and deny what God has said by changing it.

"Why hath God commanded you," ... [and here the serpent offers a corruption of God's command] ... , "that you should not eat of every tree of paradise?"​

And so it goes with every innovation in religion and every error taught by men. So it is with God's words through the Baptist, "behold the lamb of God, behold he who takes away the sin of the world" , which becomes, in the hands of men who innovate in religion and create a new religion of their own, "behold the lamb of God, behold he who takes away the sin of the elect alone."

But what is the standard for truth? The Bible or a "Church" not mentioned in scripture?

 

[MoreCoffee]

But what is the standard for truth? The Bible or a "Church" not mentioned in scripture?

Neither the bible nor the Church is the standard of truth but both draw from Christ who is himself The Truth.

Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.​

John 14:6

Everything is measured by Christ and everything is tested by him. He is the judge who shall judge the world.

For neither does the Father judge any man: but hath given all judgment to the Son.​

John 5:22

 

[1689Dave]

Neither the bible nor the Church is the standard of truth but both draw from Christ who is himself The Truth.

Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.​

John 14:6

Everything is measured by Christ and everything is tested by him. He is the judge who shall judge the world.

For neither does the Father judge any man: but hath given all judgment to the Son.​

John 5:22

But Jesus' words are everywhere in scripture. You guys cannot be found anywhere in scripture. Unless the Reformers were right and your guy is the Antichrist.

 

[MoreCoffee]

But Jesus' words are everywhere in scripture. You guys cannot be found anywhere in scripture. Unless the Reformers were right and your guy is the Antichrist.

It is sufficient for me that Christ be praised everywhere, his glory acknowledged, his truth believed.

Holy Scripture speaks truth from God.

The Church is Christ's body, it is the pillar and ground of truth.

that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.​

Christ is the source of all the truth.

 

[1689Dave]

It is sufficient for me that Christ be praised everywhere, his glory acknowledged, his truth believed.

Holy Scripture speaks truth from God.

The Church is Christ's body, it is the pillar and ground of truth.

that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.​

Christ is the source of all the truth.

But the church is not a physical institution. What you call church is not found in scripture. It's a Walmart-type business franchise that sells its own version of religion.

 

[MoreCoffee]

But the church is not a physical institution. What you call church is not found in scripture. It's a Walmart-type business franchise that sells its own version of religion.

What you've written is a redefinition of "church", it will only lead to corruption and harm. I urge you to let the scriptures speak unchanged to you.

Of course the body of Christ is both physical and spiritual; both present on Earth and present in heaven. Catholics await the second advent of Christ and the day when all of the body shall be in God's presence.

 

[1689Dave]

What you've written is a redefinition of "church". Of course the body of Christ is both physical and spiritual; both present on Earth and present in heaven. Catholics await the second advent of Christ and the day when all of the body shall be in God's presence.

You need to define Church by scripture. None of the institutional, denominational "churches" fit scripture. They are religious franchises that serve the church (people) at best. Most enslave people.

church. A word generally used to translate the generic Greek word ekklēsia, which variously means “gathering,” “assembly” or “congregation

Grenz, S., Guretzki, D., & Nordling, C. F. (1999). Pocket dictionary of theological terms (p. 26). InterVarsity Press.

 

[Josiah]

Faith, as in the milk of human kindness will not save.

@1689Dave


Not by itself. Just as the Cross will not save by itself. BOTH are essential to personal justification. There is no salvation apart from Jesus and faith in Him. It's not either/or it's both/and.

Your repudiation of faith - that heresy - is the foundation of your entire apologetic, your point on which everything rests: If Jesus died for all then all would be saved; the ONLY POSSIBLE reason why some aren't saved is because Christ never died for that person. Your heresy. It's the basis of your apologetic.

Faith is a supernatural gift of God

Yup. Now stop the diversions. You do this VERY PREDICTABLY every time you have nothing to support your claim; when you have an empty hand. Then you switch topics to something you can support - but isn't what we're talking about. It's a silly debate game even middle schoolers would not do.

Church

Are you EVER going to stop all the rabbit holes, all the red herrings, all the diversions? We all KNOW why you do this: It's the only "caught debator" thing - when you have nothing to support your position, try to change the topic to something you CAN support. You do it often.

We're not talking about the church. We're not talking about whether faith is 100% the work and gift of God (all of us supporting the historic, Gospel position believe that) or whatever. We're not talking about whether Newsom will run for president. The issue is does Scripture state that Jesus died for all OR does it state that Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY for some FEW. I understand why you constantly need to get the focus on something else, something you CAN defend, but we're on to you. It's a Junior High Debate Team method - that doesn't work for them.

Your apologetic is: If Jesus died for all then all are saved." That apologetic is founded ENTIRELY on the point that faith is irrelevant to the issue, faith has no role in salvation. Which is why when we respond, "but faith is also essential" you MUST either ignore us (or admit your heresy) - this is what you nearly always do - or change the subject AGAIN, off on another game of chasing rabbits down rabbit holes, more red herrings, more diversions.


Stop all the games.
We quoted - verbatim, no spins - our Scriptures that flat out state our position. "Jesus died for all."
You have offered NOTHING that states your position: "Jesus did not die for all but only for some few."
Why haven't you?
I know. You know. You can't.
You've proved it.
Over and over and over and over and over and over. For hundreds of posts.
Stop the desperate, pathetic games.
You're wasting our time.


.

 

[1689Dave]

Not by itself. Just as the Cross will not save by itself. BOTH are essential to personal justification. There is no salvation apart from Jesus and faith in Him. It's not either/or it's both/and.

Your repudiation of faith - that heresy - is the foundation of your entire apologetic, your point on which everything rests: If Jesus died for all then all would be saved; the ONLY POSSIBLE reason why some aren't saved is because Christ never died for that person. Your heresy. It's the basis of your apologetic.





Yup. Now stop the diversions. You do this VERY PREDICTABLY every time you have nothing to support your claim; when you have an empty hand. Then you switch topics to something you can support - but isn't what we're talking about. It's a silly debate game even middle schoolers would not do.




.

Faith is a fruit of the Holy Spirit. If you must choose to have faith, you don't have it. You have intellectual assent instead.

 

[Josiah]

Faith is a fruit of the Holy Spirit.

Yup.

Yet your entire apologetic for this HORRIBLE invention rests wholly on your heresy that faith is irrelevant to salvation, the point you raise perpetually that: "If Jesus died for all then all would be saved." "The only possible reason why some aren't saved is because Christ never died for them." It all depends on your heresy, the heresy that faith is irrelevant, meaningless, a joke, having no role in personal justification.

To try to evade your obvious and constant heresy, you like to switch topics (a desperate method for those with nothing), you make some true statement that you can defend and which no one will challenge. As if you claimed Saturn is bigger than Jupiter and you make the point, "Biden is president of the US!" It's very silly. And very obvious.



Now, are you EVER going to stop all the rabbit holes, all the red herrings, all the diversions? We all KNOW why you do this: It's the only "caught debator" thing - when you have nothing to support your position, try to change the topic to something you CAN support. You do it often.

We're not talking about the church. We're not talking about whether faith is 100% the work and gift of God (all of us supporting the historic, Gospel position believe that) or whatever. We're not talking about whether Newsom will run for president. The issue is does Scripture state that Jesus died for all OR does it state that Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY for some FEW. I understand why you constantly need to get the focus on something else, something you CAN defend, but we're on to you. Your heresies. Your logical fallacies. Your endless games.

Your apologetic is: If Jesus died for all then all are saved." That apologetic is founded ENTIRELY on the point that faith is irrelevant to the issue, faith has no role in salvation. Which is why when we respond, "but faith is also essential" you MUST either ignore us (or admit your heresy) - this is what you nearly always do - or change the subject AGAIN, off on another game of chasing rabbits down rabbit holes, more red herrings, more diversions.


Stop all the games.
We quoted - verbatim, no spins - our Scriptures that flat out state our position. "Jesus died for all."
You have offered NOTHING that states your position: "Jesus did not die for all but only for some few."
Why haven't you?
I know. You know. You can't.
You've proved it.
Over and over and over and over and over and over. For hundreds of posts.
Stop the desperate, pathetic games.
You're wasting our time.




.

 

[1689Dave]

Yup.

Yet your entire apologetic for this HORRIBLE invention rests wholly on your heresy that faith is irrelevant to salvation, the point you raise perpetually that: "If Jesus died for all then all would be saved." "The only possible reason why some aren't saved is because Christ never died for them." It all depends on your heresy, the heresy that faith is irrelevant, meaningless, a joke, having no role in personal justification.

To try to evade your obvious and constant heresy, you like to switch topics (a desperate method for those with nothing), you make some true statement that you can defend and which no one will challenge. As if you claimed Saturn is bigger than Jupiter and you make the point, "Biden is president of the US!" It's very silly. And very obvious.



Now, are you EVER going to stop all the rabbit holes, all the red herrings, all the diversions? We all KNOW why you do this: It's the only "caught debator" thing - when you have nothing to support your position, try to change the topic to something you CAN support. You do it often.

We're not talking about the church. We're not talking about whether faith is 100% the work and gift of God (all of us supporting the historic, Gospel position believe that) or whatever. We're not talking about whether Newsom will run for president. The issue is does Scripture state that Jesus died for all OR does it state that Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY for some FEW. I understand why you constantly need to get the focus on something else, something you CAN defend, but we're on to you. Your heresies. Your logical fallacies. Your endless games.

Your apologetic is: If Jesus died for all then all are saved." That apologetic is founded ENTIRELY on the point that faith is irrelevant to the issue, faith has no role in salvation. Which is why when we respond, "but faith is also essential" you MUST either ignore us (or admit your heresy) - this is what you nearly always do - or change the subject AGAIN, off on another game of chasing rabbits down rabbit holes, more red herrings, more diversions.


Stop all the games.
We quoted - verbatim, no spins - our Scriptures that flat out state our position. "Jesus died for all."
You have offered NOTHING that states your position: "Jesus did not die for all but only for some few."
Why haven't you?
I know. You know. You can't.
You've proved it.
Over and over and over and over and over and over. For hundreds of posts.
Stop the desperate, pathetic games.
You're wasting our time.




.

You seem unable to deal with what I say and use insults in an effort to take the heat off.

 

[Albion]

You seem unable to deal with what I say and use insults in an effort to take the heat off.

After it's been "dealt with" and refuted a dozen times previously, having you merely post it again in almost identical form does become tiresome as well as a waste of the members' time.

Surely you can understand this. Do you?

 

[1689Dave]

Yup.

Yet your entire apologetic for this HORRIBLE invention rests wholly on your heresy that faith is irrelevant to salvation, the point you raise perpetually that: "If Jesus died for all then all would be saved." "The only possible reason why some aren't saved is because Christ never died for them." It all depends on your heresy, the heresy that faith is irrelevant, meaningless, a joke, having no role in personal justification.

To try to evade your obvious and constant heresy, you like to switch topics (a desperate method for those with nothing), you make some true statement that you can defend and which no one will challenge. As if you claimed Saturn is bigger than Jupiter and you make the point, "Biden is president of the US!" It's very silly. And very obvious.



Now, are you EVER going to stop all the rabbit holes, all the red herrings, all the diversions? We all KNOW why you do this: It's the only "caught debator" thing - when you have nothing to support your position, try to change the topic to something you CAN support. You do it often.

We're not talking about the church. We're not talking about whether faith is 100% the work and gift of God (all of us supporting the historic, Gospel position believe that) or whatever. We're not talking about whether Newsom will run for president. The issue is does Scripture state that Jesus died for all OR does it state that Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY for some FEW. I understand why you constantly need to get the focus on something else, something you CAN defend, but we're on to you. Your heresies. Your logical fallacies. Your endless games.

Your apologetic is: If Jesus died for all then all are saved." That apologetic is founded ENTIRELY on the point that faith is irrelevant to the issue, faith has no role in salvation. Which is why when we respond, "but faith is also essential" you MUST either ignore us (or admit your heresy) - this is what you nearly always do - or change the subject AGAIN, off on another game of chasing rabbits down rabbit holes, more red herrings, more diversions.


Stop all the games.
We quoted - verbatim, no spins - our Scriptures that flat out state our position. "Jesus died for all."
You have offered NOTHING that states your position: "Jesus did not die for all but only for some few."
Why haven't you?
I know. You know. You can't.
You've proved it.
Over and over and over and over and over and over. For hundreds of posts.
Stop the desperate, pathetic games.
You're wasting our time.




.

If you chose to believe, you do not have Biblical faith. It's a work of the flesh that cannot save.

 

[1689Dave]

After it's been "dealt with" and refuted a dozen times previously, having you merely post it again in almost identical form does become tiresome as well as a waste of the members' time.

Surely you can understand this. Do you?

Not adequately. We are still talking about it. If you could refute it we would be on to something else.

 

[Josiah]

If you chose to believe, you do not have Biblical faith.

No one here said anything about anyone choosing anything. We just have even more of your games, more diversions, more evasions, more chasing after rabbits.


Here's the issue:

There are two different views:

1. Jesus died for all people.

+ This is the historic, orthodox, Christian view.
+ This is LITERALLY, VERBATIM, Word for word, what God STATES. Repeatedly. Directly.
+ It means anyone can know that Jesus died FOR THEM.

2. Jesus did NOT die for all but rather ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some few.

+ This is the terrible invention of a tiny number of Anti-Calvin folks to counter some equally absurd, silly Arminianists.
+ It is NOWHERE stated in Scripture or in history.
+ It means no one can know if Jesus died for them (or any other individual)


Now, it would be helpful IF you could actually address the issue, but you've proven you cannot. All you are able to do is regurgitate the absurd (and occasionally heretical) extremist arguments of those Anti-Calvin guys against the equally absurd extremist views of Arminianists. Worthless since there are no Arminianists here. And two absurd, extremist, unbiblical, heretical ideas don't cancel each other put, we are just left with two absurd wrong views.


So......

All we get is:
+ Proof you have not one Scripture that states your horrible invention.
+ Diversions, evasions, "the shall game"
+ Questions (which are submissive in debate) based on heresy
+ Proof you have have nothing to submit to monergists.








.

 

[1689Dave]

No one here said anything about anyone choosing anything. We just have even more of your games, more diversions, more evasions, more chasing after rabbits.


Here's the issue:

There are two different views:

1. Jesus died for all people.

+ This is the historic, orthodox, Christian view.
+ This is LITERALLY, VERBATIM, Word for word, what God STATES. Repeatedly. Directly.
+ It means anyone can know that Jesus died FOR THEM.

2. Jesus did NOT die for all but rather ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some few.

+ This is the terrible invention of a tiny number of Anti-Calvin folks to counter some equally absurd, silly Arminianists.
+ It is NOWHERE stated in Scripture or in history.
+ It means no one can know if Jesus died for them (or any other individual)


Now, it would be helpful IF you could actually address the issue, but you've proven you cannot. All you are able to do is regurgitate the absurd (and occasionally heretical) extremist arguments of those Anti-Calvin guys against the equally absurd extremist views of Arminianists. Worthless since there are no Arminianists here. And two absurd, extremist, unbiblical, heretical ideas don't cancel each other put, we are just left with two absurd wrong views.


So......

All we get is:
+ Proof you have not one Scripture that states your horrible invention.
+ Diversions, evasions, "the shall game"
+ Questions (which are submissive in debate) based on heresy
+ Proof you have have nothing to submit to monergists.








.

Universal atonement supposedly only saves those who save themselves by works, or else all would be saved.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Universal atonement supposedly only saves those who save themselves by works, or else all would be saved.

Not to put too fine a point on it, your statements are close to gibberish.

Jesus is "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world". What part of that statement is beyond your comprehension?