Everyone will be resurrected, regardless of their faith in Christ - but Ultimate Reconciliation is a lie

[Der Alte]

I have explained the first part of your response to Aaron 112. vs 22 is an equation. There is no distinction whatsoever.
In I Cor 15:23ff is giving the order of that resurrection. Christ obviously is the first born of the dead. Those that in Christ will follow and the rest last. Then vs 53 makes it emphatic not just all the dead, but all mortals will put on immortality and incorruption. I don't see any exception. Why would there be? We all have the same nature that Christ assumed, it will be made alive when He comes again. Where does that human nature change, anywhere in scripture?

Anybody can cram disparate verses together and make the Bible say almost anything. Vs. 53 does not say what you think it does. To whom is the epistle to the Corinthians addressed? Do you know? Certainly NOT all mankind!

1 Corinthians 15:1-3
(1) Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
(2) By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
(3) For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
1 Corinthians 15:58
(58) Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.​

Everything in this chapter applies only to beloved brethren NOT all mankind.

 

[Cassian]

The Title of the Thread is True. Universal /and Ultimate/ Reconciliation is a lie from the devil himself, it is a false gospel.

Theology cannot and does not change this, but if it is anyone accepting UR, then they are not to be talked to nor have a meal with, lest we take part in their abomination and sin.

Yes, It has been a heresy for about 1800 years since Origin's thoughts on the matter were condemned by the early church.
But as I explained, Reconciliation means to make right. To say that God makes all men as individuals right with Him is contrary to all of scripture. Man, when he believers is reconciling himself to God. That is what justification or reconciliation by faith means.
However, if one is speaking of the Incarnation, then definitely, He, Christ, reconciled the world to God. There are texts that I cited in my first response. This again comes from a faulty understanding of the Incarnation.

 

[Cassian]

Anybody can cram disparate verses together and make the Bible say almost anything. Vs. 53 does not say what you think it does. To whom is the epistle to the Corinthians addressed? Do you know? Certainly NOT all mankind!

1 Corinthians 15:1-3​

(1) Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;​

(2) By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.​

(3) For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;​

1 Corinthians 15:58​

(58) Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.​

Everything in this chapter applies only to beloved brethren NOT all mankind.

Really, of course it is addressed to believers, but it is about what Christ did through His Incarnation. A word that is not in the Bible, but the theology is. In fact there were Judaizers as well as Sadducees who did not believe in a resurrection of the dead. Much like Plato. You live, you die and that's it.
However, Paul writes unequivocally that if one does not believe in the resurrection of the dead, then the believers to whom he is speaking are believing in vain and Christ never arose from the dead. It is definitely about all mankind. It cannot be otherwise. Or can you show from scripture just how all other men will be raised. Scripture does not even allude to two different physical resurrections. So how does your theology align?
Can you show that there are two different human natures that man possesses. Did he create two Adams, one sinned was condemned to death and another with a different nature either lives eternally because he did not sin, or did sin but from this group only unbelievers would exist and won't be raised. Course all of these rhetorical questions contradict scripture as well. Sounds more like a limited atonement of Calvinism which is patently false. It denies the Incarnation of Christ, thus denies one of the hallmarks of Christianity.

 

[Aaron112]

There are texts that I cited in my first response.

Doesn't matter at this point,, if you think all men will eventually be saved or redeemed, that is still heresy, still a false gospel.

 

[Der Alte]

Really, of course it is addressed to believers, but it is about what Christ did through His Incarnation. A word that is not in the Bible, but the theology is. In fact there were Judaizers as well as Sadducees who did not believe in a resurrection of the dead. Much like Plato. You live, you die and that's it.
However, Paul writes unequivocally that if one does not believe in the resurrection of the dead, then the believers to whom he is speaking are believing in vain and Christ never arose from the dead. It is definitely about all mankind. It cannot be otherwise. Or can you show from scripture just how all other men will be raised. Scripture does not even allude to two different physical resurrections. So how does your theology align?
Can you show that there are two different human natures that man possesses. Did he create two Adams, one sinned was condemned to death and another with a different nature either lives eternally because he did not sin, or did sin but from this group only unbelievers would exist and won't be raised. Course all of these rhetorical questions contradict scripture as well. Sounds more like a limited atonement of Calvinism which is patently false. It denies the Incarnation of Christ, thus denies one of the hallmarks of Christianity.

I'm not a Calvinist! A bunch of vague, irrelevant accusations which do not address anything I posted. What you didn't pick up on. Paul started out talking to believers only and ended up talking about believers only. He doesn't suddenly change a verse or 2 in the middle and start talking about all mankind. The reason I know that beyond any question, is this.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: [no wrongdoer] neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:19-21
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Ephesians 5:5 For this ye know, that [no wrongdoer] no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
1 Corinthians 3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.​

 

[Mark Quayle]

Indeed... I happen to think both Calvin and Arminius were wrong for the very same reason. They both thought that we are awarded righteousness directly for our faith, rather than inheriting it when our faith in the gospel qualifies us as Abraham's descendants and heirs of the righeousness of Christ which was given to him. This is why the Calvinistic debate never ends... they are both wrong in their framework.

Show me that, somewhere in Calvinist or even Reformed theology, where "we are awarded righteousness directly for our faith". There is no earned righteousness, nevermind as some award for our faith. In the strictest sense, 'our faith' isn't even ours. I can't help but guess you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Absolutely. Salvation actually does not happen until a believer dies. If one is faithful eternal life awaits him, I Pet 1:3-5. Man reconciles himself to God by faith. We are justified by faith.
All men are being called to repentance by the Holy Spirit in this world. All men will give an account of their deeds at the judgement. Rom 2:5-8.
No man will be able to give an excuse to that he did not know God. Rom 1:18-25.

Contextually it is speaking about all mortals, all who have died. If you can show from scripture that not all men died by the condemnation of death to Adam you will have a beginning. Also need to show that Heb 2:14 is false in that Christ did not take upon himself our human nature. Where is that contradicted?
I would suggest that some of you do a thorough study of the Incarnation.

Feel like a mosquito in a nudist camp. Where do I begin!

You seem to think I don't believe things I do believe, including 4 things Scripture says specifically. Not so. If Scripture says it, I believe it. But you also say things Scripture does not say. For eg. "Salvation actually does not happen until a believer dies" —While that might be a good reference to the final dwelling place of the believer, it is not accurate to the whole work (or definition) of Salvation in the Believer, which begins before death.

And no, contextually is is not speaking about all mortals. Your reasoning does not hold up that I must show that all men died by the condemnation of death to Adam, nor do I need to show that Heb 2:14 is false. That is only YOUR reasoning, as though those two questions defeat what I believe. As far as I can tell they aren't even relevant to my point. Nor, by the way, does the fact that "no man will be able to give an excuse" bear any weight against what I was saying.

 

[Cassian]

Doesn't matter at this point,, if you think all men will eventually be saved or redeemed, that is still heresy, still a false gospel.

You really must have a comprehension problem. Let me put it as simply as I can for you.
You use the word saved which can be used but it confuses you.
Scripture is very clear on what Christ did. He reconciled the world period. That is everything that He created. What He did not do is save individuals referencing our relationship with God. That was the purpose of the Incarnation, His death and resurrection. Whether individuals are saved totally depends on man's response to God, through the Holy Spirit calling all men to repentance

The topic is confusing because who ever wrote it, does not understand the meaning of the words used and to whom they apply.

 

[Cassian]

I'm not a Calvinist! A bunch of vague, irrelevant accusations which do not address anything I posted. What you didn't pick up on. Paul started out talking to believers only and ended up talking about believers only. He doesn't suddenly change a verse or 2 in the middle and start talking about all mankind. The reason I know that beyond any question, is this.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10​

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: [no wrongdoer] neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,​

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.​

Galatians 5:19-21​

19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,​

20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,​

21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.​

Ephesians 5:5 For this ye know, that [no wrongdoer] no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.​

1 Corinthians 3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.​

First, I didn't accuse you or anyone of anything. Do you understand what rhetorical means?
The rest of your post I fully agree with. Including, as I agreed earlier that Paul is speaking to believers from beginning to end. The issue is what did Christ do for the world of which obviously believers would be part of.
Your confusion comes about because you have no clear understanding what Christ did being Incarnate.

 

[Cassian]

Feel like a mosquito in a nudist camp. Where do I begin!

You seem to think I don't believe things I do believe, including 4 things Scripture says specifically. Not so. If Scripture says it, I believe it. But you also say things Scripture does not say. For eg. "Salvation actually does not happen until a believer dies" —While that might be a good reference to the final dwelling place of the believer, it is not accurate to the whole work (or definition) of Salvation in the Believer, which begins before death.

One is being saved in this life. You cannot speak about others as finite (saved) in this world. It is a journey toward salvation, that if one is faithful to the end they will inherit that salvation. I Pet 1-3. Since it depends on man's will to remain faithful and many have not, with many examples in scripture. You may have assurance for yourself, but even that, you have the freedom to change your mind.

And no, contextually is is not speaking about all mortals. Your reasoning does not hold up that I must show that all men died by the condemnation of death to Adam, nor do I need to show that Heb 2:14 is false. That is only YOUR reasoning, as though those two questions defeat what I believe. As far as I can tell they aren't even relevant to my point. Nor, by the way, does the fact that "no man will be able to give an excuse" bear any weight against what I was saying.

Your statement here shows you have no clear understanding of the fall in relation to what Christ did via His Incarnation to reverse the fall. They are an equation. What Adam did Gen 3:9, Rom 5:12, Christ reversed. It is as simple as that. I Cor 15:20-22 could not be clearer. And so is I Cor 15:52-53.
Heb 2:14-16 is telling us Christ assume the same nature as mankind, our human nature, for what reason. That He might defeat the one who held the power of death. We know that also from II Tim 1:10. Heb 2:9. That He reconciled the world, II Cor 5:18-19, Col 1:20, Eph 1:10,

 

[Mark Quayle]

Mark Quayle said:
"Feel like a mosquito in a nudist camp. Where do I begin!

You seem to think I don't believe things I do believe, including 4 things Scripture says specifically. Not so. If Scripture says it, I believe it. But you also say things Scripture does not say. For eg. "Salvation actually does not happen until a believer dies" —While that might be a good reference to the final dwelling place of the believer, it is not accurate to the whole work (or definition) of Salvation in the Believer, which begins before death."

One is being saved in this life. You cannot speak about others as finite (saved) in this world. It is a journey toward salvation, that if one is faithful to the end they will inherit that salvation. I Pet 1-3. Since it depends on man's will to remain faithful and many have not, with many examples in scripture. You may have assurance for yourself, but even that, you have the freedom to change your mind.

I hope you can understand that is only one way to look at it. You speak as though dependence on time passage is absolute, as though that is God's way of seeing things. True, the Bible uses terminology meaning, "being saved", but also terminology that does not imply a continuous action. Not a verb, but an adjective, "saved". But perhaps even more importantly, it refers to the act, and the predetermination of God concerning the elect, that they are his from the foundation of the world, in whom he will complete all he has determined to do. This is not only a description of an ongoing process, but a description of (from his point of view) fact spoken into reality. It is not only going to become reality —it IS reality.

Nevertheless, we are sealed by the Spirit of God who lives within us, we are going to persevere, we are HIS. We are transformed, we are regenerated, a new creature, and that, not by the power of free will, but by the will of God. The fact of it does not depend on us. "Were God to withdraw his hand, there would be no truth."

If indeed one falls away, then indeed it was dependent on that one.


Mark Quayle said:
"And no, contextually is is not speaking about all mortals. Your reasoning does not hold up that I must show that all men died by the condemnation of death to Adam, nor do I need to show that Heb 2:14 is false. That is only YOUR reasoning, as though those two questions defeat what I believe. As far as I can tell they aren't even relevant to my point. Nor, by the way, does the fact that "no man will be able to give an excuse" bear any weight against what I was saying."

Your statement here shows you have no clear understanding of the fall in relation to what Christ did via His Incarnation to reverse the fall. They are an equation. What Adam did Gen 3:9, Rom 5:12, Christ reversed. It is as simple as that. I Cor 15:20-22 could not be clearer. And so is I Cor 15:52-53.
Heb 2:14-16 is telling us Christ assume the same nature as mankind, our human nature, for what reason. That He might defeat the one who held the power of death. We know that also from II Tim 1:10. Heb 2:9. That He reconciled the world, II Cor 5:18-19, Col 1:20, Eph 1:10,

You are not even arguing to what I was saying. You are peppering your shots about as though they were aimed. How do I say this another way so you'll understand? —Ah! What you are saying is irrelevant to my original objection.

 

[Cassian]

Mark Quayle said:
"Feel like a mosquito in a nudist camp. Where do I begin!

You seem to think I don't believe things I do believe, including 4 things Scripture says specifically. Not so. If Scripture says it, I believe it. But you also say things Scripture does not say. For eg. "Salvation actually does not happen until a believer dies" —While that might be a good reference to the final dwelling place of the believer, it is not accurate to the whole work (or definition) of Salvation in the Believer, which begins before death."

I hope you can understand that is only one way to look at it. You speak as though dependence on time passage is absolute, as though that is God's way of seeing things. True, the Bible uses terminology meaning, "being saved", but also terminology that does not imply a continuous action. Not a verb, but an adjective, "saved". But perhaps even more importantly, it refers to the act, and the predetermination of God concerning the elect, that they are his from the foundation of the world, in whom he will complete all he has determined to do. This is not only a description of an ongoing process, but a description of (from his point of view) fact spoken into reality. It is not only going to become reality —it IS reality.

Nevertheless, we are sealed by the Spirit of God who lives within us, we are going to persevere, we are HIS. We are transformed, we are regenerated, a new creature, and that, not by the power of free will, but by the will of God. The fact of it does not depend on us. "Were God to withdraw his hand, there would be no truth."

If indeed one falls away, then indeed it was dependent on that one.


Mark Quayle said:
"And no, contextually is is not speaking about all mortals. Your reasoning does not hold up that I must show that all men died by the condemnation of death to Adam, nor do I need to show that Heb 2:14 is false. That is only YOUR reasoning, as though those two questions defeat what I believe. As far as I can tell they aren't even relevant to my point. Nor, by the way, does the fact that "no man will be able to give an excuse" bear any weight against what I was saying."

You are not even arguing to what I was saying. You are peppering your shots about as though they were aimed. How do I say this another way so you'll understand? —Ah! What you are saying is irrelevant to my original objection.

And just what was your original objection?
You do have a very sound knowledge of Calvinism as portrayed in this post. I can see now why most of historical Christianity goes right over your head. Believers are never referred to as "saved" in the NT. The so-called predeterminism of the elect cannot be found in scripture without imposing the interpretation of Calvinism.
That you believe such in your choice. However, if you actually understood the Incarnation you would also understand Calvin's theology denies it. It happens to be a hallmark of historical Christianity.

 

[Cassian]

He Declared He is going to destroy the world, and everything, not with water, but with fire.

The ones who displease Him, get destroyed.

Period.

So, you don't believe that He will make all things new. Rev 21: 1, 5
Obviously you don't believe in eternal damnation either if the wicked get destroyed. Isn't that annihilationism?

 

[Mark Quayle]

And just what was your original objection?

I'll use this, which is what I was thinking of, mostly, instead of the first objection I brought up. This, I am more curious about than your other mistakes.

MQ said: "And no, contextually is is not speaking about all mortals. Your reasoning does not hold up that I must show that all men died by the condemnation of death to Adam, nor do I need to show that Heb 2:14 is false. That is only YOUR reasoning, as though those two questions defeat what I believe. As far as I can tell they aren't even relevant to my point. Nor, by the way, does the fact that "no man will be able to give an excuse" bear any weight against what I was saying."

—So, why must I show that all men died by the condemnation of death to Adam, even if I do believe it. What is the relevance of this to what you thought I was saying?
—And why need I show that Heb 2:14 is false? What is the relevance of this to what you thought I was saying?
—And how is the Rom 1 reference to the fact that "no man will be able to give an excuse" relevant to what I was saying?

You do have a very sound knowledge of Calvinism as portrayed in this post. I can see now why most of historical Christianity goes right over your head.

I'll let that shot fly right past my head, too.

Believers are never referred to as "saved" in the NT.

Let's see.... "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."; "For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved."; "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God..." Do you need more?

The so-called predeterminism of the elect cannot be found in scripture without imposing the interpretation of Calvinism.

What do you think "the elect" in its various forms means? What is it referring to? What does "chosen in him before the foundation of the world" mean? Be careful, now. You don't want to impose your personal theology on it.

(By the way, Paul is nothing, Apollos is nothing, Calvinism is nothing, Reformed is nothing, all is Christ.)

That you believe such in your choice. However, if you actually understood the Incarnation you would also understand Calvin's theology denies it. It happens to be a hallmark of historical Christianity

That's a serious accusation. I certainly hope you have more than opinion and misrepresentation to back it up.

 

[Cassian]

Let's see.... "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."; "For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved."; "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God..." Do you need more?

Present tense and future tense. Shall is not past or even present tense. You need either has been saved or have been saved. Or believe and you are saved.
Again, your second one is a continuous action, One is being saved through faith. We lose faith we lose salvation unless one repents and returns before it is too late.
So, where is this guarantee that just belief gets you saved in this life.
I don't think you will find any.
I can give you a lot of texts were "believes" is used which is present tense continuous action. John 3:16 is excellent.
Just a note, if you think it means one thing and can find only two that may seem to say w hat you want it to say, but there are some 30 other texts that all have present tense believes with continuous action. Or uses future fulfilment as in John 3:16. The word "will" is also used to denote future. Your assumption on two may be incorrect.

What do you think "the elect" in its various forms means? What is it referring to? What does "chosen in him before the foundation of the world" mean? Be careful, now. You don't want to impose your personal theology on it.

I don't create my own theology, I use the theology that has been in existence for 2000 years. That text has been exegeted the same way since the beginning. The elect refers to members of Christ's body. It was foreordained that Christ would establish His Church in this world and those that joined that Church through baptism are called the elect.

That's a serious accusation. I certainly hope you have more than opinion and misrepresentation to back it up.

Here is your statement " Not a verb, but an adjective, "saved". But perhaps even more importantly, it refers to the act, and the predetermination of God concerning the elect, that they are his from the foundation of the world, in whom he will complete all he has determined to do."
As far as I know Calvinism is the only theology that supports this phrase, The only difference you use predetermination, Calvin uses predestination. Unless you know of other men's theology that supports this concept, enlighten me.

 

[Mark Quayle]

So, where is this guarantee that just belief gets you saved in this life.
I don't think you will find any.
I can give you a lot of texts were "believes" is used which is present tense continuous action. John 3:16 is excellent.
Just a note, if you think it means one thing and can find only two that may seem to say w hat you want it to say, but there are some 30 other texts that all have present tense believes with continuous action. Or uses future fulfilment as in John 3:16. The word "will" is also used to denote future. Your assumption on two may be incorrect.

Where did I say, "Just belief gets you saved in this life"?

By the way, in the Greek, the second "saved" I mentioned above, is not even an adjective, as I first characterized it, but a noun — Thus it doesn't demonstrate present continuous action, nor continuous action at all.

I don't create my own theology, I use the theology that has been in existence for 2000 years. That text has been exegeted the same way since the beginning. The elect refers to members of Christ's body. It was foreordained that Christ would establish His Church in this world and those that joined that Church through baptism are called the elect.

So, if it was foreordained, what is the problem? God caused it.

Cassian said:
That you believe such in your choice. However, if you actually understood the Incarnation you would also understand Calvin's theology denies it. It happens to be a hallmark of historical Christianity

Here is your statement " Not a verb, but an adjective, "saved". But perhaps even more importantly, it refers to the act, and the predetermination of God concerning the elect, that they are his from the foundation of the world, in whom he will complete all he has determined to do."
As far as I know Calvinism is the only theology that supports this phrase, The only difference you use predetermination, Calvin uses predestination. Unless you know of other men's theology that supports this concept, enlighten me.

You said, "Calvinism is the only theology that supports this phrase"? Which phrase? And HOW does this back up your claim that Calvin's theology denies the Incarnation of Christ Jesus?

 

[Cassian]

Where did I say, "Just belief gets you saved in this life"?

If one holds that one is saved upon moment of belief or a moment where the past tense "saved" is used then what happens after is inconsequential.

So, if it was foreordained, what is the problem? God caused it.

The point, He did not foreordain who the members of His Church would be. That depends on those that believe, man's choice.

Cassian said:
That you believe such in your choice. However, if you actually understood the Incarnation you would also understand Calvin's theology denies it. It happens to be a hallmark of historical Christianity

You said, "Calvinism is the only theology that supports this phrase"? Which phrase?

The phrase I quoted you as saying,

And HOW does this back up your claim that Calvin's theology denies the Incarnation of Christ Jesus? That the elect are predestined to be believers, He called it unconditional election. This is why Calvin believed in a limited atonement which is a direct denial of the Incarnation. It's an impossibility.

 

[Mark Quayle]

If one holds that one is saved upon moment of belief or a moment where the past tense "saved" is used then what happens after is inconsequential.

In the absolute sense, that statement is patently absurd, as shown by the fact that even in your use of "saved" the moment of salvation is upon entry into Heaven, (or, at least, not being sent into the Lake of Fire when without the salvation they would have been so sent.) If at that moment they are saved, there is most definitely a consequential 'what happens after'.

But even during/within this temporal realm, the term, "saved", Biblically includes not only the promise of what happens after death (and what doesn't happen after death) but the very consequential fact of being freed from slavery to sin, (just for starters).

 

[Cassian]

In the absolute sense, that statement is patently absurd, as shown by the fact that even in your use of "saved" the moment of salvation is upon entry into Heaven, (or, at least, not being sent into the Lake of Fire when without the salvation they would have been so sent.) If at that moment they are saved, there is most definitely a consequential 'what happens after'.

We were not discussing after death, but in ones present state of being saved. Stay on topic,.

But even during/within this temporal realm, the term, "saved", Biblically includes not only the promise of what happens after death (and what doesn't happen after death) but the very consequential fact of being freed from slavery to sin, (just for starters).

That we (all of mankind) is freed from death and the power of sin - that's the atonement.
The believer still sins, but that's why we need to confess our sins to remain IN Christ. Which is why our journey toward salvation is wrought with many trials and tribulations. Man is being swayed by two forces in this life. The Holy Spirit calling all men to repent and believe, and Satan trying to hold on to what He has and works very hard to get back what he lost.

 

[Mark Quayle]

We were not discussing after death, but in ones present state of being saved. Stay on topic,.

WHAT?? You want me to argue according to your narrative? To you, staying on topic means one must argue assuming one is "being saved"?

In your zeal for your narrative, you seem to miss my point entirely. If what I am saying against your notion, (that we are only "being saved", and not "already saved"), then your notion falsifying your statement (that there is no consequential "what happens after") applied to the one 'finally' saved ('after' this life), also demonstrates my point: That if one IS already saved during this life, there is a consequential "what happens after". You have no way to show that there is no consequential "what happens after" during this life by supposing yourself able to describe your 'after'. By doctrine, SAVED, in the Biblical implies a consequential "what happens after".

That we (all of mankind) is freed from death and the power of sin - that's the atonement.
The believer still sins, but that's why we need to confess our sins to remain IN Christ. Which is why our journey toward salvation is wrought with many trials and tribulations. Man is being swayed by two forces in this life. The Holy Spirit calling all men to repent and believe, and Satan trying to hold on to what He has and works very hard to get back what he lost.

Show me. Start with your first sentence. How does the atonement actually free all of mankind from death and the power of sin?

John 8:34 "Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who is committing sin, is a servant of sin,"