Christ Gave Himself Up Only For the Church

[Josiah]

I guess you haven't been reading your own posts...
Obviously, you didn't read the opening post (that you wrote) or the title of the thread (which you created).


You may not even be aware of the dogma you are finding impossible to defend. LIMITED atonement is that the atonement of Christ is LIMITED. It is that, "God the Father designed the work of redemption specifically with a view to providing salvation only for the elect, and that Christ died only for His sheep and laid down His life only for those the Father had given to Him." The doctrine is NOT that the effect or fruit of this is limited, but that the actual atonement is limited. But as you have proven, not only does this directly contradict a LOT of clear Scriptures but is entirely unsupported by Scriptures (as you've proven so well).

Your attempt to dodge the reality that this new dogma of a tiny minority of Calvinists directly contradicts Scripture and has NO Scripture to support it by imposing your ABSURD claim of "pelagianism" and "universalism" (trying to dodge your problem) -neither of which has anything whatsoever to do with this and neither of which is remotely supported but strongly rejected by @Albion and myself. Again, you follow many uber-Calvinists in rejecting Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide by simply regarding faith as irrelevant; simply eliminate that from the issue of justification. A lack of FAITH is why this atonement does not benefit the unbeliever, NOT a lack of the Savior, the Cross, mercy, grace. Faith is the variant, not Christ.

Ah, so now you claim that faith is a human effort that is lacking.

No one has remotely suggested any such thing. You are just trapped and trying to change the subject.


.

 

[MennoSota]

No one has remotely suggested any such thing. You are just trapped and trying to change the subject.


.

You are. You just won't admit it. Better for you to live in a conundrum where you imagine your position doesn't contradict God's Sovereignty. You just aren't willing to actually put your view to the microscope and see the massive flaws.

 

[Andrew]

You are. You just won't admit it. Better for you to live in a conundrum where you imagine your position doesn't contradict God's Sovereignty. You just aren't willing to actually put your view to the microscope and see the massive flaws.

Please teach us the ways of non dogmatism Menno, we all wish we were as gifted by God in understanding of scripture as you are

 

[MennoSota]

Please teach us the ways of non dogmatism Menno, we all wish we were as gifted by God in understanding of scripture as you are

Speak to the topic.

 

[Andrew]

Speak to the topic.

Christ redeemed only the church?
Yes and No.
According to the book of Revelations God also redeems the saints of the great tribulation, this is a particular interest to Israel whom God will be dealing with most exclusively during that time (without the church).

 

[MennoSota]

Christ redeemed only the church?
Yes and No.
According to the book of Revelations God also redeems the saints of the great tribulation, this is a particular interest to Israel whom God will be dealing with most exclusively during that time (without the church).

All the elect throughout the ages, Andrew. All the elect make up the church.

 

[Andrew]

All the elect throughout the ages, Andrew. All the elect make up the church.

You speak of the All Knowing God yes?
God who is outside of all creation and time?
I would believe as scripture tells us, that God "searches the hearts of men" and he indeed called for followers in him (not after him) and that many will claim and will be found liars, and that many will be liars but found bowing at our feet!
God who sees through all knows all, but he gives us clues that reveal to us that he indeed searches the heart of men throughout ALL time...
So it can appear to you that God's word says "yea and behold I made this thing in my image and now the end, that's all" when you neglect HIS willingness to SEARCH.
Of course he would call his followers the ELECT because they are..

 

[MoreCoffee]

Funny, in your interpretation, the human doesn't have to be a Christian.

Saint John wrote: "if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world".

Any human, in your interpretation, is atoned for. That's pure universalism.

It is not interpretation when it is a quote without comment. Saint John wrote if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world you reject what he wrote.

To you, faith and repentance is unnecessary.

Jesus said: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news." when Arsenios quoted that you complained it was salvation by works. Now you insist on it. It looks like your theology cannot receive the words of God.

This is the obvious interpretation of your position, MC.

Saint John wrote: "if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world'".

Yet, you cannot see what you are preaching.
Why do you despise God's Sovereignty over humans?

It is your shockingly inconsistent theology that deserved to be despised by every Christian.

 

[MennoSota]

Saint John wrote: "if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world".


It is not interpretation when it is a quote without comment. Saint John wrote if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world you reject what he wrote.


Jesus said: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news." when Arsenios quoted that you complained it was salvation by works. Now you insist on it. It looks like your theology cannot receive the words of God.


Saint John wrote: "if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world'".



It is your shockingly inconsistent theology that deserved to be despised by every Christian.

MC, it is obvious that you are incapable of seeing your blatant contradiction, of which you are simply ignorant.
You cannot grasp the context of scripture so you just make up an opinion and apply it to all humanity.
You have this odd teaching that Jesus atoned for the sins of the world, but his atonement is not sufficient to save. Man must do, do, do and if man does not do, then Christ's atonement is worthless.
Semi-pelagianism causes me to shake my head. It denies the power of God to fully save.

 

[MoreCoffee]

MC, it is obvious that you are incapable of seeing your blatant contradiction, of which you are simply ignorant.
You cannot grasp the context of scripture so you just make up an opinion and apply it to all humanity.
You have this odd teaching that Jesus atoned for the sins of the world, but his atonement is not sufficient to save. Man must do, do, do and if man does not do, then Christ's atonement is worthless.
Semi-pelagianism causes me to shake my head. It denies the power of God to fully save.

Your posts are just way too incoherent and silly to bother with.

 

[pinacled]

Which day are women circumcised?

 

[Josiah]

Christ redeemed only the church?
Yes and No.
According to the book of Revelations God also redeems the saints of the great tribulation, this is a particular interest to Israel whom God will be dealing with most exclusively during that time (without the church).

[MENTION=387]Andrew[/MENTION]


The question is not whether God redeems everyone, it's whether Christ died for everyone or instead ONLY, exclusively, solely for the "church" the "elect" - the few.


"LIMITED Atonement" is one of the 5 foundational/defining dogmas of radical, extreme Calvinists (those that embrace TULIP) This dogma (invented in the late 16th Century and existing only with a small subset of Calvinists) is NOT that the EFFECT of atonement is limited but that the actual atonement is limited. God loves only a few.... God's grace exists only for a few.... God has mercy for only a few.... Christ died for only a few...... The Cross is not for most. God's love doesn't exist for most. And of course, there's no list of who is on this short list, so there's no way to know if God loves YOU, if God cares for YOU, if God's mercy exists for YOU, whether what Christ did/does is for YOU (after all, it's not for most). This is the most rejected of the 5 points of TULIP but in large part, is the foundation to all the other points.

Of course, this new invention of some radical followers of Calvin (it doesn't come from Calvin himself) has many problems:

1. It's entirely unsupported in Scripture, which is why MennoSota cannot give any Scripture that actually teachers it.
2. It out-right contradicts a LOT of Scriptures, all of which our Reformed/Baptist friend simply ignores.
3. It makes evangelism and mission work impossible since no one can proclaim to anyone that Jesus is THEIR Savior, that the Gospel is for THEM, that Jesus died for THEM, that God loves THEM (because He probably doesn't)
4. It makes faith irrelevant since there is no way to know if our faith is actually embracing something that exists for US.... after all, for most, there is no divine love, mercy, grace, forgiveness, salvation - just absolute emptiness, So the faith may be genuine and it's object true - but the faith be irrelevant, moot, worthless because (as one finds out ONLY when they are checked into heaven or hell) it may be that it was embracing.... nothing.


It is TRUE that not all are saved, atonement does not ultimately embrace everyone. But this is not because of the absence of Christ but the absence of faith. The "reason" is not that Christ offers nothing to most people, it's that most people trust nothing that is offered. Christ died for all (as the Bible repeatedly, boldly states).... it's just that not all trust/rely/embrace Him.


Understand, friend, that after the Lutheran Reformation, there developed a radical extreme movement aimed at Lutheranism AND Catholicism. It's now known as Arminianism. It was a LOGICAL construction that simply is contrary to Scripture and Tradition (but makes a bit of sense to the fallen, sinful, puny brains of man). Some of the followers of Calvin RIGHTLY disagreed with this movement and wished to COUNTER it, point-by-point, and in so doing, made the exact same mistakes (following the Arminianists point by point) - inventing a LOGICAL construct that is clearly against Scripture and Tradition (as MennoSota has proven so well). These two human inventions of the 16th Century have been at "war" with each other for 400 years - each proving how unbiblical the other is (and both are right about that!) but both making the IDENTICAL same mistake: ignoring the witness of Scripture in order to support their newly invented theory that each concludes is "logical" even though each undermines everything and is clearly against Scripture. Lutherans embrace Scripture.... and admits there is some MYSTERY here, some aspects of how all this "cranks out" that we don't mentally understand. And for the great majority of Christians for 2000 years, that's okay. Our job is to trust God and proclaim the Gospel - not "correct" God by telling Him what is "logical" and how He so often misspoke in His Holy Word. TULIP and Arminianism are both radical, "logical" extreme corrections of Scripture - and while equally "Logical" are equally wrong. And both are SO locked into war with each other, neither "sees" the error of EACH or even that there is another alternative - what the Bible says.




- Josiah




,

 

[MennoSota]

Galatians 4:4-5
But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.

 

[MennoSota]

[MENTION=387]Andrew[/MENTION]


The question is not whether God redeems everyone, it's whether Christ died for everyone or instead ONLY, exclusively, solely for the "church" the "elect" - the few.


"LIMITED Atonement" is one of the 5 foundational/defining dogmas of radical, extreme Calvinists (those that embrace TULIP) This dogma (invented in the late 16th Century and existing only with a small subset of Calvinists) is NOT that the EFFECT of atonement is limited but that the actual atonement is limited. God loves only a few.... God's grace exists only for a few.... God has mercy for only a few.... Christ died for only a few...... The Cross is not for most. God's love doesn't exist for most. And of course, there's no list of who is on this short list, so there's no way to know if God loves YOU, if God cares for YOU, if God's mercy exists for YOU, whether what Christ did/does is for YOU (after all, it's not for most). This is the most rejected of the 5 points of TULIP but in large part, is the foundation to all the other points.

Of course, this new invention of some radical followers of Calvin (it doesn't come from Calvin himself) has many problems:

1. It's entirely unsupported in Scripture, which is why MennoSota cannot give any Scripture that actually teachers it.
2. It out-right contradicts a LOT of Scriptures, all of which our Reformed/Baptist friend simply ignores.
3. It makes evangelism and mission work impossible since no one can proclaim to anyone that Jesus is THEIR Savior, that the Gospel is for THEM, that Jesus died for THEM, that God loves THEM (because He probably doesn't)
4. It makes faith irrelevant since there is no way to know if our faith is actually embracing something that exists for US.... after all, for most, there is no divine love, mercy, grace, forgiveness, salvation - just absolute emptiness, So the faith may be genuine and it's object true - but the faith be irrelevant, moot, worthless because (as one finds out ONLY when they are checked into heaven or hell) it may be that it was embracing.... nothing.


It is TRUE that not all are saved, atonement does not ultimately embrace everyone. But this is not because of the absence of Christ but the absence of faith. The "reason" is not that Christ offers nothing to most people, it's that most people trust nothing that is offered. Christ died for all (as the Bible repeatedly, boldly states).... it's just that not all trust/rely/embrace Him.


Understand, friend, that after the Lutheran Reformation, there developed a radical extreme movement aimed at Lutheranism AND Catholicism. It's now known as Arminianism. It was a LOGICAL construction that simply is contrary to Scripture and Tradition (but makes a bit of sense to the fallen, sinful, puny brains of man). Some of the followers of Calvin RIGHTLY disagreed with this movement and wished to COUNTER it, point-by-point, and in so doing, made the exact same mistakes (following the Arminianists point by point) - inventing a LOGICAL construct that is clearly against Scripture and Tradition (as MennoSota has proven so well). These two human inventions of the 16th Century have been at "war" with each other for 400 years - each proving how unbiblical the other is (and both are right about that!) but both making the IDENTICAL same mistake: ignoring the witness of Scripture in order to support their newly invented theory that each concludes is "logical" even though each undermines everything and is clearly against Scripture. Lutherans embrace Scripture.... and admits there is some MYSTERY here, some aspects of how all this "cranks out" that we don't mentally understand. And for the great majority of Christians for 2000 years, that's okay. Our job is to trust God and proclaim the Gospel - not "correct" God by telling Him what is "logical" and how He so often misspoke in His Holy Word. TULIP and Arminianism are both radical, "logical" extreme corrections of Scripture - and while equally "Logical" are equally wrong. And both are SO locked into war with each other, neither "sees" the error of EACH or even that there is another alternative - what the Bible says.




- Josiah




,

Did Jesus atone for all humanity?
If yes, why is not all humanity saved?

Let us sit back and watch the tortured pretzeling begin.

 

[Arsenios]

It is TRUE that not all are saved, atonement does not ultimately embrace everyone.
But this is not because of the absence of Christ but the absence of faith.
The "reason" is not that Christ offers nothing to most people,
it's that most people trust nothing that is offered.
Christ died for all (as the Bible repeatedly, boldly states)....
it's just that not all trust/rely/embrace Him.

Josiah - I totally agree with this post...
However, you rascally polliwog...
IN YOUR OWN ARGUMENTS AGAINST ME...
Christ is the ONLY Savior...
So...
What's with this ingredient we have to provide in order to be saved?
This ingredient you call our very own trust/reliance/embracing Him???

I cannot tell you how tickled I am to find us of one accord!


Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

Josiah - I totally agree with this post...
However, you rascally polliwog...
IN YOUR OWN ARGUMENTS AGAINST ME...
Christ is the ONLY Savior...
So...
What's with this ingredient we have to provide in order to be saved?
This ingredient you call our very own trust/reliance/embracing Him???

I cannot tell you how tickled I am to find us of one accord!


Arsenios

Indeed, Josiah has revealed the great dilemma and massive contradiction that makes no sense at all.

1) It is TRUE that not all are saved, atonement does not ultimately embrace everyone.

Indeed, Limited atonement

2) But this is not because of the absence of Christ but the absence of faith.

Indeed, Humans cannot conjure up faith.

3) The "reason" is not that Christ offers nothing to most people, it's that most people trust nothing that is offered.

Humans can conjure up faith. Notice the contradiction with the second statement.

4) Christ died for all (as the Bible repeatedly, boldly states).... it's just that not all trust/rely/embrace Him.

Unlimited Atonement, which contradicts the first statement. Followed by humans conjuring up their own faith, which contradicts the second statement.

Josiah has a major dilemma on his hands as he contradicts himself. The first statement cannot be true if he holds to statements 3 and 4.
The second statement cannot be true if he holds to statements 3 and 4.

Josiah has wonderfully exposed his problem, which he has yet to grasp. This is nearly the same position I once held as an Arminian for decades.
It was scripture that taught me I had a massive contradiction that needed to be resolved. I could not claim unlimited atonement and yet claim that only the sin of unbelief could not be forgiven. Either God's atonement must be fully effective or else humans must hold the power over the atonement by their choice. Human choice, would have to be the key that unlocks hell, not God's atonement. Humans would be the ultimate ruler and God's atonement would be secondary.
Either I was sovereign or God was Sovereign. It couldn't be both.
Josiah's dilemma and yours, is that you want it to be both. That is syncretism.

 

[MennoSota]

Matthew 1:21
"She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for
he will save his people
from their sins.”

Even the angels knew that Jesus came to atone for His people...the church.

 

[Josiah]

Matthew 1:21
"She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for
he will save his people
from their sins.”

Even the angels knew that Jesus came to atone for His people...the church.

What profound silliness..... how illogical.


If I posted, "I love my wife" you thus argue it is a dogmatic fact that I thus don't love God or my parents. Even if I state that I do. It could not be a more silly, more illogical argument.
If I posted, "My wife is an American citizen" you would insist that it is a dogmatic fact that there is only one American citizen and that thus it is impossible for you to be such. How utterly absurd.
Think.




Read the following.... do not ignore but believe:


1 John 2:2 Note: It states that Jesus is the expiation for our sins AND NOT ONLY OURS BUT FOR THE SINS OF THE ENTIRE WORLD. Not, "... for the sins of only a few people chosen from out of the whole world."

Hebrews 2:9 Note: It states Christ died for "everyone"

John 1:29 Note: Of the "whole world"

1 John 4:14 Note: "Savior of the whole world"

John 4:42 Note: "Savior of the world"

John 3:14-16 (see with Numbers 21 where the staff is for ALL who look upon it)

... and so many more.



Now, can you at long last finally quote a verse that says what you do: That Jesus died ONLY for a few? Some verses that would contradict the above Scriptures?

The question is not whether God redeems everyone, it's whether Christ died for everyone or instead ONLY, exclusively, solely for the "church" the "elect" - the few.


"LIMITED Atonement" is one of the 5 foundational/defining dogmas of radical, extreme Calvinists (those that embrace TULIP) This dogma (invented in the late 16th Century and existing only with a small subset of Calvinists) is NOT that the EFFECT of atonement is limited but that the actual atonement is limited. God loves only a few.... God's grace exists only for a few.... God has mercy for only a few.... Christ died for only a few...... The Cross is not for most. God's love doesn't exist for most. And of course, there's no list of who is on this short list, so there's no way to know if God loves YOU, if God cares for YOU, if God's mercy exists for YOU, whether what Christ did/does is for YOU (after all, it's not for most). This is the most rejected of the 5 points of TULIP but in large part, is the foundation to all the other points.



Of course, this new invention of some radical followers of Calvin (it doesn't come from Calvin himself) has many problems:

1. It's entirely unsupported in Scripture, which is why MennoSota cannot give any Scripture (not one) that actually teachers it.

2. It out-right contradicts a LOT of Scriptures, all of which our Reformed/Baptist friend simply ignores.

3. It makes evangelism and mission work impossible since no one can proclaim to anyone that Jesus is THEIR Savior, that the Gospel is for THEM, that Jesus died for THEM, that God loves THEM (because He probably doesn't)

4. It makes faith irrelevant since there is no way to know if our faith is actually embracing something that exists for US.... after all, for most, there is no divine love, mercy, grace, forgiveness, salvation - just absolute emptiness, So the faith may be genuine and it's object true - but the faith be irrelevant, moot, worthless because (as one finds out ONLY when they are checked into heaven or hell) it may be that it was embracing.... nothing.


It is TRUE that not all are saved, atonement does not ultimately embrace everyone. But this is not because of the absence of Christ but the absence of faith. The "reason" is not that Christ offers nothing to most people, it's that most people trust nothing that is offered. Christ died for all (as the Bible repeatedly, boldly states).... it's just that not all trust/rely/embrace Him.


Understand, friend, that after the Lutheran Reformation, there developed a radical extreme movement aimed at Lutheranism AND Catholicism. It's now known as Arminianism. It was a LOGICAL construction that simply is contrary to Scripture and Tradition (but makes a bit of sense to the fallen, sinful, puny brains of man). Some of the followers of Calvin RIGHTLY disagreed with this movement and wished to COUNTER it, point-by-point, and in so doing, made the exact same mistakes (following the Arminianists point by point) - inventing a LOGICAL construct that is clearly against Scripture and Tradition (as MennoSota has proven so well). These two human inventions of the 16th Century have been at "war" with each other for 400 years - each proving how unbiblical the other is (and both are right about that!) but both making the IDENTICAL same mistake: ignoring the witness of Scripture in order to support their newly invented theory that each concludes is "logical" even though each undermines everything and is clearly against Scripture. Lutherans embrace Scripture.... and admits there is some MYSTERY here, some aspects of how all this "cranks out" that we don't mentally understand. And for the great majority of Christians for 2000 years, that's okay. Our job is to trust God and proclaim the Gospel - not "correct" God by telling Him what is "logical" and how He so often misspoke in His Holy Word. TULIP and Arminianism are both radical, "logical" extreme corrections of Scripture - and while equally "Logical" are equally wrong. And both are SO locked into war with each other, neither "sees" the error of EACH or even that there is another alternative - what the Bible says.




.

IN YOUR OWN ARGUMENTS AGAINST ME...Christ is the ONLY Savior...

"There is NO OTHER NAME UNDER HEAVEN by which any may be saved." Etc. etc., etc., etc., etc. The belief that Jesus is not the Savior but that self is, that is not Scriptural. There is one Savior. And it's not you or me. But this thread is not about how many Saviors there are or if such is you or Jesus






- Josiah



.

 

[MennoSota]

Indeed, Josiah has revealed the great dilemma and massive contradiction that makes no sense at all.

Indeed, Limited atonement


Indeed, Humans cannot conjure up faith.

Humans can conjure up faith. Notice the contradiction with the second statement.

Unlimited Atonement, which contradicts the first statement. Followed by humans conjuring up their own faith, which contradicts the second statement.

Josiah has a major dilemma on his hands as he contradicts himself. The first statement cannot be true if he holds to statements 3 and 4.
The second statement cannot be true if he holds to statements 3 and 4.

Josiah has wonderfully exposed his problem, which he has yet to grasp. This is nearly the same position I once held as an Arminian for decades.
It was scripture that taught me I had a massive contradiction that needed to be resolved. I could not claim unlimited atonement and yet claim that only the sin of unbelief could not be forgiven. Either God's atonement must be fully effective or else humans must hold the power over the atonement by their choice. Human choice, would have to be the key that unlocks hell, not God's atonement. Humans would be the ultimate ruler and God's atonement would be secondary.
Either I was sovereign or God was Sovereign. It couldn't be both.
Josiah's dilemma and yours, is that you want it to be both. That is syncretism.

Bump for [MENTION=13]Josiah[/MENTION].
You ignored this.

 

[MennoSota]

What profound silliness..... how illogical.


If I posted, "I love my wife" you thus argue it is a dogmatic fact that I thus don't love God or my parents. Even if I state that I do. It could not be a more silly, more illogical argument.
If I posted, "My wife is an American citizen" you would insist that it is a dogmatic fact that there is only one American citizen and that thus it is impossible for you to be such. How utterly absurd.
Think.




Read the following.... do not ignore but believe:


1 John 2:2 Note: It states that Jesus is the expiation for our sins AND NOT ONLY OURS BUT FOR THE SINS OF THE ENTIRE WORLD. Not, "... for the sins of only a few people chosen from out of the whole world."

Hebrews 2:9 Note: It states Christ died for "everyone"

John 1:29 Note: Of the "whole world"

1 John 4:14 Note: "Savior of the whole world"

John 4:42 Note: "Savior of the world"

John 3:14-16 (see with Numbers 21 where the staff is for ALL who look upon it)

... and so many more.



Now, can you at long last finally quote a verse that says what you do: That Jesus died ONLY for a few? Some verses that would contradict the above Scriptures?










"There is NO OTHER NAME UNDER HEAVEN by which any may be saved." Etc. etc., etc., etc., etc. The belief that Jesus is not the Savior but that self is, that is not Scriptural. There is one Savior. And it's not you or me. But this thread is not about how many Saviors there are or if such is you or Jesus






- Josiah



.

Does the angel say "He will save the entire world from their sins?"
He doesn't.
The angel says "He will save His people from their sins."
What is illogical about the angels statement, Josiah?