The Doctrines of Grace

[Scott Downey]

Alright I will give it a go.
1 Jn 2.2 and 2 Pet 2.1 both do away with limited atonement. In 2 Pet the false teaches are said to be redeemed/bought. That is, Christ bought them and they are unbelievers. There is no statement that Christ potentially bought them but they have to become believers first. Simply put, the unbelievers' sins have been paid for. Not contingent on where or not they get saved.

False Teachers and Their Destruction​

1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.

1 John 2.2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

But how can someone go to hell if their sins have been forgiven them?

 

[PinSeeker]

Alright I will give it a go.

Oh boy. <smile>

1 Jn 2.2 and 2 Pet 2.1 both do away with limited atonement. In 2 Pet the false teaches are said to be redeemed/bought. That is, Christ bought them and they are unbelievers. There is no statement that Christ potentially bought them but they have to become believers first. Simply put, the unbelievers' sins have been paid for. Not contingent on where or not they get saved.

False Teachers and Their Destruction​

1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.

1 John 2.2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

As I said a few posts ago to another poster, KUWN, there is a sense in which Christ died for the world — His sacrifice was sufficient for all — but also a sense in which Christ only died for God’s elect — His sacrifice was only made effectual (by God, of course) for those God chose before the foundation of the world to be conformed to the image of His Son.

Both senses are true, the former is a universal atonement regarding sufficiency, but the latter a limited atonement regarding efficacy. And the latter is the sense of John Calvin's 'L.' God has mercy on whom He will have mercy, compassion on whom He will have compassion, as God Himself, through Moses and quoted by Paul, said. Obviously, Paul understood well both senses of Christ’s perfect atonement, and here in Romans 9, He is speaking not of humanity as a whole but a limited group being God's elect.

This is not really directed at you, KUWN, but to anyone who disputes the limited nature of Christ's atonement, Paul asks (rhetorically, of course), “Who are you, O man, to answer back to God, ‘Why have you made me like this? Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show His wrath and to make known His power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of His glory for vessels of mercy, which He has prepared beforehand for glory — even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?” (Romans 9)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

Alright I will give it a go.
1 Jn 2.2 and 2 Pet 2.1 both do away with limited atonement. In 2 Pet the false teaches are said to be redeemed/bought. That is, Christ bought them and they are unbelievers. There is no statement that Christ potentially bought them but they have to become believers first. Simply put, the unbelievers' sins have been paid for. Not contingent on where or not they get saved.

False Teachers and Their Destruction​

1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.

1 John 2.2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 John 2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

Do you believe that Christ's blood covers every human whoever lived?

 

[ElectedbyHim]

Oh boy. <smile>


As I said a few posts ago to another poster, KUWN, there is a sense in which Christ died for the world — His sacrifice was sufficient for all — but also a sense in which Christ only died for God’s elect — His sacrifice was only made effectual (by God, of course) for those God chose before the foundation of the world to be conformed to the image of His Son.

Both senses are true, the former is a universal atonement regarding sufficiency, but the latter a limited atonement regarding efficacy. And the latter is the sense of John Calvin's 'L.' God has mercy on whom He will have mercy, compassion on whom He will have compassion, as God Himself, through Moses and quoted by Paul, said. Obviously, Paul understood well both senses of Christ’s perfect atonement, and here in Romans 9, He is speaking not of humanity as a whole but a limited group being God's elect.

This is not really directed at you, KUWN, but to anyone who disputes the limited nature of Christ's atonement, Paul asks (rhetorically, of course), “Who are you, O man, to answer back to God, ‘Why have you made me like this? Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show His wrath and to make known His power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of His glory for vessels of mercy, which He has prepared beforehand for glory — even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?” (Romans 9)

Grace and peace to you.

Excellent.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Scott Downey]

People seem to be adding on to what atonement means.

How can it mean anything other than the forgiveness of sins, and is only for those who believe in Christ.

 

[KUWN]

Do you believe that Christ's blood covers every human whoever lived?

I use a literal interpretation method, which has some figures of speech, metaphors, etc. So 1 Jn 2.2 and 2 Pet 2.1 tells me that Christ paid the price for all sins. False teachers are bought/redeemed.

 

[KUWN]

As I said a few posts ago to another poster, KUWN, there is a sense in which Christ died for the world — His sacrifice was sufficient for all — but also a sense in which Christ only died for God’s elect — His sacrifice was only made effectual (by God, of course) for those God chose before the foundation of the world to be conformed to the image of His Son.

I don't believe that at all. All sins have been paid for, no unbeliever will answer for the sins he commits in this life, not in any eternal way.

 

[KUWN]

But how can someone go to hell if their sins have been forgiven them?

Eternal condemnation is not related to sins. Sins are not what eternally condemns us. I have a post out here where I give a little more info. Look for something titles Two Condemnations.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

I use a literal interpretation method, which has some figures of speech, metaphors, etc. So 1 Jn 2.2 and 2 Pet 2.1 tells me that Christ paid the price for all sins. False teachers are bought/redeemed.

That is eisegesis.

So, the false teachers who deny them have had their sins paid for?

Why is there a hell?

 

[ElectedbyHim]

People seem to be adding on to what atonement means.

How can it mean anything other than the forgiveness of sins, and is only for those who believe in Christ.

This is correct.

 

[Scott Downey]

Eternal condemnation is not related to sins. Sins are not what eternally condemns us. I have a post out here where I give a little more info. Look for something titles Two Condemnations.

Unless you are forgiven your sins, you go to hell when you die.
Romans 4

Abraham Justified by Faith​

1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father[a] has found according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was [b]accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted [c]as grace but as debt.

David Celebrates the Same Truth​

5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.”

John 8:21
Then Jesus said to them again, “I am going away, and you will seek Me, and will die in your sin. Where I go you cannot come.”

John 8:24
Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”

IF you die in your sins, where Christ goes (heaven) you cannot come.

And if you cannot then go to heaven, there is only one other place for you....

 

[Ezra]

How did you come to believe in Christ?

in a revival service i specifically heard the Lord say now or never i took the now. went to the altar said God save me right at 30 years later i m still going

 

[KUWN]

That is eisegesis.

So, the false teachers who deny them have had their sins paid for?

Why is there a hell?

1 Jn 2.2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

2 Pt 2.1 They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them

Look at the Great White Throne judgment, you will not find the word sins there. Same with the Rewards Ceremony (aka Judgment seat of Christ/God), no sins mention there either.

Here is a vs that will confuse you:
2 Cor 5.19 God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them.

You contend that this is eisegesis, please tell me how.

 

[Scott Downey]

in a revival service i specifically heard the Lord say now or never i took the now. went to the altar said God save me right at 30 years later i m still going

See, by grace you have been saved, and this was not of you, it was His gift in His choosing to save you. God opened your heart to heed His Word, (Christ).

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

1 Jn 2.2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

2 Pt 2.1 They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them

Look at the Great White Throne judgment, you will not find the word sins there. Same with the Rewards Ceremony (aka Judgment seat of Christ/God), no sins mention there either.

Here is a vs that will confuse you:
2 Cor 5.19 God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them.

You contend that this is eisegesis, please tell me how.

Believe this, I am in no way confused.

KUWN said:
I use a literal interpretation method, which has some figures of speech, metaphors, etc. So 1 Jn 2.2 and 2 Pet 2.1 tells me that Christ paid the price for all sins. False teachers are bought/redeemed.

You interpretation (eisegesis) says that all humans are bought and paid for, the above statedment includes false teachers.

Again I will ask, why is there a hell?

 

[KUWN]

You interpretation (eisegesis) says that all humans are bought and paid for, the above statedment includes false teachers.

Again I will ask, why is there a hell?

I will be more than happy to answer your simple question, but you owe me an answer. All you can do is "say" my interpretation is eisegesis without any proof. I will admit you are not a serious bible student, but if you make a claim like you have, you will need to defend it, not just assert it. The 3 passages I cite only uses information found within the passages themselves.

 

[JLB]

I will be more than happy to answer your simple question, but you owe me an answer. All you can do is "say" my interpretation is eisegesis without any proof. I will admit you are not a serious bible student, but if you make a claim like you have, you will need to defend it, not just assert it. The 3 passages I cite only uses information found within the passages themselves.

Yes, that is his MO.

Just deny what the scriptures say and begin to attack with derogatory statements.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

I will be more than happy to answer your simple question, but you owe me an answer. All you can do is "say" my interpretation is eisegesis without any proof. I will admit you are not a serious bible student, but if you make a claim like you have, you will need to defend it, not just assert it. The 3 passages I cite only uses information found within the passages themselves.

I owe nobody anything.

Look at the verse.

1 John 2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

If I use your interpretation, that means every person who ever lived will be saved, that also measn that the blood of Christ has covered those who do not believe. Therefore no one will be in hell.

The "world" in verse 2 is a generic term, it does not mean every single human, but to mankind in general. The elect.

Also @PinSeeker provided the same interpretation I would have but you have refused it.

PinSeeker said:
As I said a few posts ago to another poster, KUWN, there is a sense in which Christ died for the world — His sacrifice was sufficient for all — but also a sense in which Christ only died for God’s elect — His sacrifice was only made effectual (by God, of course) for those God chose before the foundation of the world to be conformed to the image of His Son.

“And not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” Here John refers to the extent of Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Scholars usually comment that the extent of Christ’s death is universal but the intent is for believers. Or in different words, Christ’s death is sufficient for the whole world but efficient for the elect. John Calvin, however, observes that although these comments are true, they do not pertain to this passage.4 The phrase the whole world relates not to every creature God has made, for then the fallen angels also would share in Christ’s redemption. The word whole describes the world in its totality, not necessarily in its individuality.

In another context, John distinguishes between the “children of God” and “the children of the devil” (1 John 3:1, 10) and then concludes, “Jesus Christ laid down his life for us” (v. 16). Jesus died for all the people who believe in him and who come “from every nation, tribe, people and language” as a “great multitude that no one [can] count” (Rev. 7:9).5

Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen, Exposition of James and the Epistles of John, vol. 14, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953–2001), 253.


The apostle’s words and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world have been understood by many to refer to an unlimited atonement, by which Christ provides a potential salvation for all people without exception. Logically, such an interpretation strips the work of Christ on the cross of any actual atonement for anyone specifically, and it provides only a potential satisfaction for God’s wrath. (For an analysis of other aspects of the extent of the atonement.

To be faithful to the truth revealed in Scripture, the whole world must be comprehended as a generic expression that refers to humanity throughout the earth, but not necessarily to every individual. World simply identifies the earthly realm of mankind to which God directed His reconciling love and provided propitiation (cf. John 1:29; 3:16; 6:51; 1 Tim. 2:5–6; Titus 2:11; Heb. 2:9). The language of Scripture is strong and clear, stating that Christ’s death actually satisfies fully and eternally the demands of God’s wrath for those who believe (John 10:11, 15; 17:9, 20; Acts 20:28; Rom. 8:32, 37; Eph. 5:25). Though the Savior’s death intrinsically had infinite value, it was designed to actually (not potentially) secure the satisfaction for divine justice only on behalf of those who would believe.

John MacArthur, 1, 2, 3 John, MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2007), 48–49.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

I will be more than happy to answer your simple question, but you owe me an answer. All you can do is "say" my interpretation is eisegesis without any proof. I will admit you are not a serious bible student, but if you make a claim like you have, you will need to defend it, not just assert it. The 3 passages I cite only uses information found within the passages themselves.

I will admit you are not a serious bible student

Personal attacks are anticipated.

 

[KUWN]

Personal attacks are anticipated.

Just let it be known that you can not answer my question.