MennoSota said:
Did Christ die and atone for all humanity's sin?
If yes, then all humanity is justified.
.
So Christ didn't die for all the sins of the world? The "all" doesn't mean all? What does it mean?
I believe 1 John 2:2. I believe God inspired the correct words (and not opposite of what He should have inspired). I don't "hate" it, I don't deny it by deleting the words in it and then substituting the opposite words, I think it's right, I think God is right. If it conflicts with your speculation, well, that's your problem.
1 John 2:2 is clear. Yes, you must delete what it says and replace the words you delete with the opposite to make your position credible. Same is true for SO many Scriptures. Scripture is clear: Jesus died for all sins. And Scripture is clear: that does not mean all are justified since not all have faith. Your position, that if Jesus died for all sins then all are saved, is unbiblical (and illogical). You are just parroting an unbiblical (and illogical) but oft-made talking point of some in your denomination (and yes, it reveals how Limited Atonement is inseparable from DOUBLE Predestination, however both wrong).
OBVIOUSLY, just because Christ died for all of course does not mean all are justified. You TRIED to make some false paradigm you yourself know is false. I realize universalism came out of Calvinism, but you basing your question on Universalism is absurd since you and all Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox reject it. Those justified are so because Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide applies, as ONE united and inseparable truth (the Chief Article of Protestantism). Eliminate any aspect of that (as Universalism does and as you tried to in your silly question) and justification doesn't apply. John 3:16 does not say, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son so all are saved regardless of whether they have faith." Thus, obviously, we can hold that Jesus died for all (and thus 1 John 2:2 is NOT lying and need not be twisted inside out and upside down as Calvinists must do) but that does not mean that all are justified. You had to deny the Chief Article and become a Universalist to frame the question to me as you did, to hold that if 1 John 2:2 is true then ERGO all are justified.
NO Lutheran here is teaching Universalism (that came out of Calvinism), and
NO Lutheran here is denying predestination of the justified. Lutherans here are just rejecting what atpollard posted nearly all Calvinists have now also rejected: DOUBLE predestination, the "speculation" of one man in the 16th Century that "goes beyond Scripture" in order to "remove the mystery Scripture presents." Just as all the Reformed in this thread have indicated, but you. Lutherans reject that.... just as it seems nearly all Calvinists now do; atpollard and others indicating the Reformed are now essentially Lutheran on this ('its now just a matter of semantics').
It is an illogical and silly ploy of some hyper-Calvinists to insist that if 1 John 2:2 is believed then Universalism must be believed. The ploy mandates their abandoning Protestantism and it's chief article. Just as it is a constant, illogical, silly ploy of hyper-Calvinists to insist that if they can show Arminianism is false, ERGO hyper-Calvinism is true. What an absurd, illogical position! Truth is, BOTH are in part wrong.... both are what all the Calvinists here but you have essentially admitted, both are "logical constuctions" that are "speculations" that "go beyond Scripture" in order to "remove the mystery Scripture presents." And as the other Reformed here have admitted (just not you), most Reformed have realized this and are now essentially Lutheran on this point ("its now mostly a matter of semantics"). And yes, there has been a side point where the Reformed here (except you) are distancing themselves from Limited Atonement (another part of TULIP); they aren't buying the illogical ploy that if 1 John 2:2 is actually true then all are saved because faith is entirely irrelevant and has nothing to do with anything. Your old, old Calvinist ploy here is illogical and wrong.
Back to the issue, which is DOUBLE predestination (what you stated, "God chooses some for pardon and some for punishment"). See posts 121 and 124
- Josiah
.
