Limited atonement !

[brightfame52]

PROVE it.

I cant prove it to you, right now God has blinded you to believe a lie, you out of luck if you wanting me to prove it

 

[Hey You!]

I cant prove it to you, right now God has blinded you to believe a lie, you out of luck if you wanting me to prove it

Then it is unprovable...

 

[Lizbeth]

but since they belong to His Church He will do everything needed to save them and cause them to believe the Truth.

I think you might be getting this a bit backwards.....isn't it rather that anyone needs to be saved and believe the truth first in order to belong to the church? Unless you are basing it on God's foreknowledge. Since we are "elect according to His foreknowledge"...He foreknows who will respond to the gospel call and receive Christ.

 

[Runningman]

You havent proved nothing, not that judas was saved, he was chosen to apostleship, thats it and damnation for his dastardly deed, it was best that he be not born Matt 26:24

The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.

He was doomed to perdition from his mothers womb, you know what perdition means ? He was a son of perdition dude Jn 17:12

While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

Perdtion is the opposite of salvation Phil 1:28

And in nothing terrified by your adversaries: which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation, and that of God.

Thats what judas was chosen for !

You are simply dismissing what was previously shown you from Scripture, which was a strong rebuttal against limited atonement.

Question, if Judas were never a genuine believer, why should Jesus have empowered him to drive out demons in Matt 10:1-4, something he elsewhere says is impossible for an unbeliever in Matt 12:24-28?

 

[brightfame52]

Then it is unprovable...

With men it is, but all things are possible with God

 

[brightfame52]

I think you might be getting this a bit backwards.....isn't it rather that anyone needs to be saved and believe the truth first in order to belong to the church? Unless you are basing it on God's foreknowledge. Since we are "elect according to His foreknowledge"...He foreknows who will respond to the gospel call and receive Christ.

but since they belong to His Church He will do everything needed to save them and cause them to believe the Truth.

 

[brightfame52]

You are simply dismissing what was previously shown you from Scripture, which was a strong rebuttal against limited atonement.

Question, if Judas were never a genuine believer, why should Jesus have empowered him to drive out demons in Matt 10:1-4, something he elsewhere says is impossible for an unbeliever in Matt 12:24-28?

Im finish with it.

 

[brightfame52]

Those Christ died for and with His Own Blood obtained Eternal Redemption, because of the efficasiousness of His Blood, they can never come under the penalty of sin, nor the law and satans dominion !

 

[brightfame52]

One writers comment on fullerism,

. If, as Mr. Fuller allows, Christ intended that only some should be benefited by his death, then he accomplished his intention according to particular redemption, by paving their ransom only. It is absurd to represent Christ as paying a ransom sufficient for all, when he intended only to redeem some! Or to affirm that Christ is a sufficient Saviour of those whom he never intended to save!

Whenever the Scriptures speak of the sufficiency of redemption, they always place it in the certain efficacy of redemption. The atonement of Christ is sufficient because it is absolutely efficacious, and because it carries salvation to all for whom it was made. It is sufficient, not because it affords men the possibility of salvation but because, with invincible power, it accomplishes their salvation. Hence the word of God never represents the sufficiency of the atonement as more extensive than the design of the atonement, which Mr. Fuller has done. The Scriptures know nothing of a sufficient redemption which leaves the captive to perish in slavery, nor of a sufficient atonement which never delivers the guilty; but they speak of a redemption every way sufficient and efficacious—a redemption which cannot be frustrated, but which triumphantly accomplishes the salvation of all its objects. A Defense of Particular Redemption - William Rushton

 

[Rightglory]

One writers comment on fullerism,

You can get as many Calvinists to support your view, but each is as vacuous as the next. They have no understanding of God as well, let alone atonement. You and they have no definition of atonement. You conflate atonement with how God would use the atonement.
The atonement was not made by man, it was not made to man. The atonement was God using Christ to correct the fall of man, Adam, with another MAN, namely Christ through His Incarnation to reconcile the world back to God. Christ returned the world as God intended it to be before Adam sinned and plunged the world into death, dust to dust.
His death and resurrection is the atonement. It is why it can be summed up with two short verses which addresses the two areas of what Christ accomplished. Heb 2:9, He tasted death for everyone. And I John 2:2, He propitiated the sin of the world. One could also use I John 4:14 He is the Savior of the world.
As to who God is. God is love, It is not something He does, It is who He is, Yet your theory makes God hate literally. You make Him cacpricious, particular, arbitrary when nothing in scripture every describes God with these attributes. Your theory also destroys the purpose of why God created man in the first place. It never describes His relationship with man as being unilateral, as a puppet, as a manipulator but your theory does, which is why it is not scriptural. You portray a God that cannot be found in scripture.

 

[brightfame52]

You can get as many Calvinists to support your view, but each is as vacuous as the next. They have no understanding of God as well, let alone atonement. You and they have no definition of atonement. You conflate atonement with how God would use the atonement.
The atonement was not made by man, it was not made to man. The atonement was God using Christ to correct the fall of man, Adam, with another MAN, namely Christ through His Incarnation to reconcile the world back to God. Christ returned the world as God intended it to be before Adam sinned and plunged the world into death, dust to dust.
His death and resurrection is the atonement. It is why it can be summed up with two short verses which addresses the two areas of what Christ accomplished. Heb 2:9, He tasted death for everyone. And I John 2:2, He propitiated the sin of the world. One could also use I John 4:14 He is the Savior of the world.
As to who God is. God is love, It is not something He does, It is who He is, Yet your theory makes God hate literally. You make Him cacpricious, particular, arbitrary when nothing in scripture every describes God with these attributes. Your theory also destroys the purpose of why God created man in the first place. It never describes His relationship with man as being unilateral, as a puppet, as a manipulator but your theory does, which is why it is not scriptural. You portray a God that cannot be found in scripture.

Do you understand fullerism

 

[Rightglory]

Do you understand fullerism

Don't need to. He is a Calvinist with a twist on missions. Just another man who likes his own theory better. Still modern 250 years ago. Hardly the Gospel once given. He does not portray Christ as the Savior of the world. Very simple.

 

[brightfame52]

Don't need to. He is a Calvinist with a twist on missions. Just another man who likes his own theory better. Still modern 250 years ago. Hardly the Gospel once given. He does not portray Christ as the Savior of the world. Very simple.

Well in case you haven't paid attention, my comment was about fullerism buddy

 

[BreadOfLife]

Why not? Propitiation is a Universal Price Paid, but Expiation is Limited to Believers; right?

Expiation is like that governor on an engine; it limits the throttle...

Expiation limits the Propitiation...

Because, like YOU said - it's a poor tranclation.

Not ALL sins were forgiven. The price was paid for ALL sins - but only the ones who repent and trust in Christ are forgiven . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

I cant prove it to you, right now God has blinded you to believe a lie, you out of luck if you wanting me to prove it

Then, not only bare you a fraud - you have disobeyed a dire ct Biblical command ALWAYS be ready to give a reason for this hopr of yours (2 Pet. 3:15).

Bottonm line: If you can't explain it from Scripture - then it's NOT Scriptural . . .