Christian Liberty
Well-known member
I'm just curious what he did, considering he's actually preaching the atonement. I guess they don't like that here?
The Myth of saying that Jesus Christ died for all men without exception !
- Thread starter beloved57
- Start date
Epoisses
New member
A limited atonement is not the real thing. Unless you like Calvinists change the meaning of the word 'world'. World or Kosmos can mean the world with everyone in it or world in the negative sense like when John says 'love not the world'. But it never not even one time means only the elect. I challenge any Calvinist to prove that it is.
His hyper-Calvinism gets the neg reps. He attributes evil to God and makes God vs man responsible for going to hell (his version of God delights in arbitrarily sending people to hell by decree before they exist for His glory...His God delights in frying people without hope, unlike the biblical portrayal of God).
He also makes TULIP the gospel instead of the simplicity of the person and work of Christ. So, he makes Calvinism like a sect or cult and excludes non-Calvinists from grace.
This merits neg rep despite the few good things he says.
beloved57
Well-known member
Thats the cost when one preaches the Truth without compromise !
beloved57
Well-known member
Did not die for the seed of the serpent !
Did not die for the seed of the serpent !
Another reason why Christ did not die for all mankind without exception is because of the Law of Redemption, for one had to be what is called a kinsmen redeemer in order for redemption one had to be a near kinsmen, this is also typed in the OT scriptures, See book of Ruth ! That's why Christ, when coming to perform His work of propitiation as in 1 Jn 4:10
Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
He was sent to Identify with only one specific people, the Seed of Abraham, He Himself being of the Seed of Abraham, and a near kinsmen. Heb 2:16-17
16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation or propitiation for the sins of the people.
So 1 Jn 4:10 and Heb 2:17 here are the same identical people, the seed of Abraham, who were Christ's brethren !
Now for Christ to come and die for all mankind to redeem them, He would have to had been a near kinsmen to the seed of the serpent as well. He would have to love them as well; However that seed of the serpent had not any relationship to that seed of which Christ sprung from, the Seed of the Women Gen 3:14-15
14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
You see that's Two different seeds or families being represented. Christ was not a near kinsmen to the serpents family, but He was with the Seed of the Women, and the Seed of the women [Eve] is also Adam's Seed, so Adam and Eves seed was different from the serpents seed.
So they are Two different seeds and to top that off God sovereignly put enmity/hate between the Two Seeds.
So that's why its stated that Christ took on the Seed of Abraham and not mankind in general, because some men as sinners belong to the serpents seed !
Did not die for the seed of the serpent !
Another reason why Christ did not die for all mankind without exception is because of the Law of Redemption, for one had to be what is called a kinsmen redeemer in order for redemption one had to be a near kinsmen, this is also typed in the OT scriptures, See book of Ruth ! That's why Christ, when coming to perform His work of propitiation as in 1 Jn 4:10
Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
He was sent to Identify with only one specific people, the Seed of Abraham, He Himself being of the Seed of Abraham, and a near kinsmen. Heb 2:16-17
16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation or propitiation for the sins of the people.
So 1 Jn 4:10 and Heb 2:17 here are the same identical people, the seed of Abraham, who were Christ's brethren !
Now for Christ to come and die for all mankind to redeem them, He would have to had been a near kinsmen to the seed of the serpent as well. He would have to love them as well; However that seed of the serpent had not any relationship to that seed of which Christ sprung from, the Seed of the Women Gen 3:14-15
14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
You see that's Two different seeds or families being represented. Christ was not a near kinsmen to the serpents family, but He was with the Seed of the Women, and the Seed of the women [Eve] is also Adam's Seed, so Adam and Eves seed was different from the serpents seed.
So they are Two different seeds and to top that off God sovereignly put enmity/hate between the Two Seeds.
So that's why its stated that Christ took on the Seed of Abraham and not mankind in general, because some men as sinners belong to the serpents seed !
What is this hell you are talking about?
Epoisses
New member
John 3:16 is easy, all we have to do is look at verse 19 which is the same word Kosmos -
'And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.'
This is not the elect, unless the elect are evil and love darkness.
John 4:42 'And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.'
The people who said this were Samaritans and in their thinking the elect could only mean the Jews so for them to use the word 'Kosmos' it had to mean more than just the elect. Seeing the Samaritans were a despised race to the Jews.
John uses the word Kosmos about a hundred times and every instance falls into one of two categories where it means either the whole world with everything in it or the negative sense where it means the evil of the world with everyone in it.
I am not going to go thru every verse because it would be a waste of time on you and because you have not refuted anything just given your own private interpretation.
beloved57
Well-known member
Both Jn 3:16 and John 4:42 mean the world of the elect. Were does it say it does not mean that ? Where is your proof ?
Rom. 1-3 shows that mankind is universally condemned. Rom. 4-5 is the antidote for this, intended for all (because we all need it), but only appropriated by some.
In your view, God wants some to be saved and many to be damned (Satan wants all to be damned).
In the biblical view, God wants all to be saved, yet many are damned because they reject vs receive Christ.
Your view is arbitrary and limits God's love because there is no reason why He would only save some and damn others that He could just as easily save (2 Peter 3:9; I Tim. 2:4; Jn. 3:16, Jn. 1:12, Rom. 1:16, etc.).
TULIP impugns God's character and ways. Give it up.
The word and context show that it means unregenerate men. You and Calvin are wrong to insert elect to retain a wrong view (I Tim. 2:4 all men...adding all kinds of men is eisegesis, not exegesis).
beloved57
Well-known member
All men there means the Elect. Whenever the word world, all or every are used in reference to Salvation issues, like redemption ect, its always all the Elect meant. I have given evidence of that in many of my threads and posts.
Wrong assumption=wrong conclusion.
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
If it meant Christ died for all men, that would logically lead to either all men being saved, or God being an unjust God who will punish the same sins twice. Neither of which lines up very well with what the Bible teaches about God.
The objective provision is sufficient for and intended for all. It is not subjectively appropriated by everyone. It is efficacious for those who believe. All are invited to believe.
Unlimited atonement only leads to universalism if there are no conditions to receiving it (repentant faith; receive vs reject Christ).
It does not mean God punishes the same sins twice. If the remedy is rejected (once for all death), then people die in their sins. If it is received, then their sins are dealt with.
Limited atonement means that God's love is limited, the cross is of limited power, there is no human responsibility in two-party reconciliation, the saving and damning of people is arbitrary vs just, etc.
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
that doesn't make any sense.
There can be no conditions. The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23.) Christ already died that death. If Christ died that death for the unsaved, the wages of sin would be collected twice. Which would be unjust. If you were in debt to me for $10,000, and Beloved57 paid that debt, I would be free, regardless of whether I "accepted" his gift or not, you would be unjust to try to take $10,000 from me.
But as I already showed you, if Christ paid for those sins they are dealt with anyway.
Not really. But if you're claiming that God loves every person the same, the Bible rejects that.
No, it means that Christ chose to bear the sins of the elect only.
Not really, man is still responsible, but he is powerless, if you can make that distinction.
This is ridiculous. How can it be unjust? The Bible says we are sinners who deserve death in Hell (Romans 6:23.) You act like God owes you something. He does not.
"Who are you, oh man, to talk back to God."
Epoisses
New member
What he said.
Epoisses
New member
I see sin more as a broken life so Christ's atonement was for broken lives not bad deeds. Which gets us away from the Wal-Mart atonement.