Is rejecting Christ a sin?

[elman]

Close enough.

Finally.

 

[crimsonleaf]

Finally.

LOL.

 

[Edward65]

Taking the last point first, Christ is not judging people here on earth. He says it, I say it, and now you're agreeing with it. What's your problem?

With regard to the first point (the angel) Christ's coming is good news for the whole world, insofar as anyone who believes is saved. It is not good news for those who do not and will not believe. You keep trying to make it so, so I'll ask a simple question: Bob is an atheist. Bob never chooses to believe. Bob is unsaved and follows his own path to destruction. How is Christ's atonement of his sins good news for him? It's like winning the lottery but never being sent the cheque.

To pay for the sins of someone else means they do not suffer the punishment for those sins. Yet Bob does in your scheme. Unfair. Much.

The reason why I quoted: “If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world”. (John 12:47 ESV) is to show that Christ when speaking with reference to the non-elect says He came to save the world which obviously includes them, so it follows that He also atoned for their sins too. It wouldn’t make any sense for Him to be meaning that He didn’t come to judge unbelievers (i.e. those who don’t keep His words) but He only came to save the elect.

With respect to atheist Bob even though God through His hidden will elects not to save him it doesn’t mean that Christ’s atonement isn’t good news for him as well. God has two wills His revealed will and His hidden will and it’s necessary to distinguish which will we’re talking about. According to His revealed will God loves the world and through Christ desires to save everyone in the world, so the message of the Gospel is good news for everyone including Bob because Christ has atoned for his sins as well as everyone else's. However when we are referring to God’s hidden will through which He decrees who shall be able to benefit from Christ’s atonement through granting them the Holy Spirit and the ability to believe and receive forgiveness, it isn’t good news if one hasn’t been chosen as one of His elect I agree.

However to come back to the Gospel which is what we’re discussing since Christ has atoned for everyone’s sins and it’s necessary to believe that one’s sins are forgiven in order to be saved, it’s naturally excepted that Christ has atoned for the sin of refusing to accept that through Christ our sins are forgiven. Some on your side keep saying that Christ hasn’t atoned for everyone’s sins if He doesn’t atone for the sin of persistent unbelief which just seems ridiculous to me. How can Christ atone for the sin of refusing to accept that one’s sins are atoned for? One is compounding ones sinfulness by refusing to accept that one’s sins are forgiven through Christ’s death and therefore those who are damned are damned because they are in effect charging God with being a liar for saying their sins are forgiven. So they’re damned because they reject Christ and His forgiveness and make God out to be a liar and a fraud who has promulgated a false gospel.

 

[Hammster]

I guess this was missed somehow.

I'll address this, though.

I don’t understand why you have such difficulty with believing that persistent unbelief can’t be atoned for. Belief and faith are the means by which one apprehends forgiveness for all other sins so that if faith is lacking one remains unforgiven.

Where have I said that I believe that persistent faith cannot be atoned for? We aren't discussing what sins can and cannot be atoned for. We are discussing whether or not all sins are atoned for. And so far, neither of us believe that they are.

You have a message of forgiveness but it doesn’t apply to everyone because according to what you believe Christ only atoned for the sins of the elect, therefore although you can say that if a person believes and has faith he will be saved, if asked why is belief in Christ saving you can’t reply with a blanket "because He atoned for everyone’s sins".

And I don't have a problem with that from a biblical standpoint. The apostles didn't preach that way. The thing is, YOU cannot say that He atoned for everyone's sins, either, because you don't know if they are elect. If they aren't elect, you are lying to them if you say that all of their sins have been atoned for.

You’ve got to reply that only those who have faith have had their sins atoned for, which isn’t a message a person wants to hear who is struggling with anxiety over their sins and whether they have been elected and can believe.

If they aren't elect, they wouldn't care.

To hear in those circumstances that Christ may not have atoned for one's sins because one may not be one of the elect is a very unpleasant message to hear and only adds to the anxiety.

And that's exactly what you have to tell them, if you are honest.

On the contrary what one wants to hear is that Christ has atoned for everyone’s sins including one’s own and that Christ is everyone’s Saviour including one’s own.

Tickling itching ears is frowned upon in scripture.

However you can’t tell a person this. You’re like a pizza delivery man who only has pizzas for certain people and therefore you can’t assure every hungry person you come across that you have a pizza for him and all he has to do is reach out his hand and take it.

Stupid analogy, sorry. But a pizza delivery man has an obligation to deliver pizzas to those who pay for them.

Your message of forgiveness is necessarily restricted only to those you believe Christ died for and therefore it isn’t good news for everyone but only for some.

The message of forgiveness that the bible proclaims is that those who believe will be forgiven.

 

[Hammster]

I guess this was missed, too.

I don’t understand why you have such difficulty with believing that persistent unbelief can’t be atoned for. Belief and faith are the means by which one apprehends forgiveness for all other sins so that if faith is lacking one remains unforgiven.

You have a message of forgiveness but it doesn’t apply to everyone because according to what you believe Christ only atoned for the sins of the elect, therefore although you can say that if a person believes and has faith he will be saved, if asked why is belief in Christ saving you can’t reply with a blanket "because He atoned for everyone’s sins". You’ve got to reply that only those who have faith have had their sins atoned for, which isn’t a message a person wants to hear who is struggling with anxiety over their sins and whether they have been elected and can believe. To hear in those circumstances that Christ may not have atoned for one's sins because one may not be one of the elect is a very unpleasant message to hear and only adds to the anxiety. On the contrary what one wants to hear is that Christ has atoned for everyone’s sins including one’s own and that Christ is everyone’s Saviour including one’s own. However you can’t tell a person this. You’re like a pizza delivery man who only has pizzas for certain people and therefore you can’t assure every hungry person you come across that you have a pizza for him and all he has to do is reach out his hand and take it. Your message of forgiveness is necessarily restricted only to those you believe Christ died for and therefore it isn’t good news for everyone but only for some.

You didn't answer my question. Was my assessment of your view correct, or am I missing something?

 

[Edward65]

I guess this was missed, too.



You didn't answer my question. Was my assessment of your view correct, or am I missing something?

Yes. See my reply to crimsonleaf above.

 

[Hammster]

The reason why I quoted: “If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world”. (John 12:47 ESV) is to show that Christ when speaking with reference to the non-elect says He came to save the world which obviously includes them, so it follows that He also atoned for their sins too. It wouldn’t make any sense for Him to be meaning that He didn’t come to judge unbelievers (i.e. those who don’t keep His words) but He only came to save the elect.

With respect to atheist Bob even though God through His hidden will elects not to save him it doesn’t mean that Christ’s atonement isn’t good news for him as well. God has two wills His revealed will and His hidden will and it’s necessary to distinguish which will we’re talking about. According to His revealed will God loves the world and through Christ desires to save everyone in the world, so the message of the Gospel is good news for everyone including Bob because Christ has atoned for his sins as well as everyone else's. However when we are referring to God’s hidden will through which He decrees who shall be able to benefit from Christ’s atonement through granting them the Holy Spirit and the ability to believe and receive forgiveness, it isn’t good news if one hasn’t been chosen as one of His elect I agree.

However to come back to the Gospel which is what we’re discussing since Christ has atoned for everyone’s sins and it’s necessary to believe that one’s sins are forgiven in order to be saved, it’s naturally excepted that Christ has atoned for the sin of refusing to accept that through Christ our sins are forgiven. Some on your side keep saying that Christ hasn’t atoned for everyone’s sins if He doesn’t atone for the sin of persistent unbelief which just seems ridiculous to me. How can Christ atone for the sin of refusing to accept that one’s sins are atoned for? One is compounding ones sinfulness by refusing to accept that one’s sins are forgiven through Christ’s death and therefore those who are damned are damned because they are in effect charging God with being a liar for saying their sins are forgiven. So they’re damned because they reject Christ and His forgiveness and make God out to be a liar and a fraud who has promulgated a false gospel.

You are still left with a problem. If you are presenting the gospel to a non-elect person, you are lying to them by saying that all of their sins are forgiven.

 

[Edward65]

You are still left with a problem. If you are presenting the gospel to a non-elect person, you are lying to them by saying that all of their sins are forgiven.

All their sins are atoned for except the sin of refusing to accept this. That’s implicit in the message of forgiveness since it’s obviously necessary to take God at His word and not regard Him as a liar in order to be saved.

 

[Hammster]

All their sins are atoned for except the sin of refusing to accept this. That’s implicit in the message of forgiveness since it’s obviously necessary to take God at His word and not regard Him as a liar in order to be saved.

If Bob is non-elect, aren't you being disingenuous when you tell him that all if his sins are forgiven?

 

[Edward65]

If Bob is non-elect, aren't you being disingenuous when you tell him that all if his sins are forgiven?

No, because one is excepting his refusal to accept this. One can’t be saved if one refuses to believe one is forgiven one’s sins and persists in doing so because it means one is in a continual state of rejecting God. So if one says to a person that all their sins are atoned for one isn’t including the sin of their refusal to accept this, as this is tantamount to regarding God as a liar, and no one will escape God’s wrath who regards God in this way. The Gospel is that everyone’s sins are atoned for except for the sin of continual unbelief because the Gospel requires that one accepts it through faith in order to be justified and regarded as righteous before God.

The Gospel message isn’t just that if you believe in Christ you’ll be saved, because this begs the further question as to why belief in Christ saves. And the answer to that is because Christ has atoned for everyone’s sins. That is the Gospel that everyone’s sins are atoned for through Christ, but those who believe in a limited atonement can’t tell people this because they don’t believe His atonement applies to everyone. Therefore they have to say simply that if a person believes in Christ he will be saved and leave it at that, but that’s only half the Gospel. It’s not the full Gospel. The full Gospel is that Christ has died for everyone and through believing this and trusting in Christ one will be saved.

 

[Hammster]

No, because one is excepting his refusal to accept this. One can’t be saved if one refuses to believe one is forgiven one’s sins and persists in doing so because it means one is in a continual state of rejecting God. So if one says to a person that all their sins are atoned for one isn’t including the sin of their refusal to accept this, as this is tantamount to regarding God as a liar, and no one will escape God’s wrath who regards God in this way. The Gospel is that everyone’s sins are atoned for except for the sin of continual unbelief because the Gospel requires that one accepts it through faith in order to be justified and regarded as righteous before God.

So God's wrath is on someone (Bob, the non-elect) who you've just told that their sins are forgiven. And it's on them because of a sin that isn't atoned for.

The Gospel message isn’t just that if you believe in Christ you’ll be saved, because this begs the further question as to why belief in Christ saves. And the answer to that is because Christ has atoned for everyone’s sins.

You are assuming your conclusion. You basically have circular reasoning. You are saying that the gospel says everyone's sins are atoned for because having sins atoned for is the gospel.

That is the Gospel that everyone’s sins are atoned for through Christ, but those who believe in a limited atonement can’t tell people this because they don’t believe His atonement applies to everyone.

Right. And why would we if the bible doesn't teach this? The bible teaches that the atonement, in the OT and NT, is for God's chosen people. That's the real argument. This back and forth we have right now is just showing the logical failure of your argument.

Therefore they have to say simply that if a person believes in Christ he will be saved and leave it at that, but that’s only half the Gospel. It’s not the full Gospel. The full Gospel is that Christ has died for everyone and through believing this and trusting in Christ one will be saved.

The full gospel is that God saves sinners. The only way to make your system work is to come up with a sin of continual disbelief that isn't atoned for. There's no support for your view in scripture.

 

[Edward65]

The full gospel is that God saves sinners. The only way to make your system work is to come up with a sin of continual disbelief that isn't atoned for. There's no support for your view in scripture.

John 3:16-18 teaches this:

[16] “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. [18] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God".(ESV)

This teaches unlimited atonement. Those who don’t believe in Christ can’t be condemned for not believing in Him if in fact Christ didn’t die for them. If Christ didn’t atone for the sins of unbelievers then there would be no requirement for them to believe in Him because He wouldn’t have been sent to them as their Saviour. So "world" means everyone in the world and not just the elect, and the reason why people are damned as you can see is because they don't believe that Christ is their Saviour.

 

[crimsonleaf]

John 3:16-18 teaches this:

[16] “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. [18] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God".(ESV)

This teaches unlimited atonement. Those who don’t believe in Christ can’t be condemned for not believing in Him if in fact Christ didn’t die for them. If Christ didn’t atone for the sins of unbelievers then there would be no requirement for them to believe in Him because He wouldn’t have been sent to them as their Saviour. So "world" means everyone in the world and not just the elect, and the reason why people are damned as you can see is because they don't believe that Christ is their Saviour.

This shows that Believers are saved: [16] “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

This part tells us that we are already condemned, that this is not the purpose of Christ's coming, and that believers may be saved. The opportunity is available to all men if they so desire. We know that without God's express help they won't desire Him and they won't be saved, but if man just wills to believe he can: [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

This part confirms that man is already condemned and that only belief in Christ can save him: [18] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God".(ESV)

None of this passage says, or even hints at universal atonement. It's about our pre-existing condemnation and Christ's salvation through our faith. You are making the same error every other synergist makes in insisting that !"world" means 100% of humanity, all the time. It doesn't.

A favourite parallel of mine, which never gets addressed is: Steve jobs gave the iPhone to the world; does everyone have an iPhone? Can everyone have an iPhone? World doesn't always mean everybody.

And as I've said before, the good news of the Gospel is that "Christ died for believers". That's what John 3:16 says. It doesn't say "Christ died for everyone - now believe".

 

[Edward65]

This shows that Believers are saved: [16] “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

This part tells us that we are already condemned, that this is not the purpose of Christ's coming, and that believers may be saved. The opportunity is available to all men if they so desire. We know that without God's express help they won't desire Him and they won't be saved, but if man just wills to believe he can: [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

This part confirms that man is already condemned and that only belief in Christ can save him: [18] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God".(ESV)

None of this passage says, or even hints at universal atonement. It's about our pre-existing condemnation and Christ's salvation through our faith. You are making the same error every other synergist makes in insisting that !"world" means 100% of humanity, all the time. It doesn't.

A favourite parallel of mine, which never gets addressed is: Steve jobs gave the iPhone to the world; does everyone have an iPhone? Can everyone have an iPhone? World doesn't always mean everybody.

And as I've said before, the good news of the Gospel is that "Christ died for believers". That's what John 3:16 says. It doesn't say "Christ died for everyone - now believe".

You said in a previous post that Christ’s atonement was sufficient for the whole world but efficient only for those who believe, and now you’ve just said that the opportunity to be saved is available to all men if they so desire, however this is the definition of unlimited atonement. You’re unwittingly supporting my position. What you’ve affirmed isn’t limited atonement. Limited atonement says Christ has only atoned for the sins of the elect and that it is impossible for the non-elect to be saved because they don’t have their sins forgiven through Christ’s atonement.

John 3:16-18 is talking about universal atonement for it says that unbelievers are condemned for not believing in Christ, and unbelievers can’t be damned for not believing in Christ if indeed Christ didn’t die for their sins. If Christ didn’t die for their sins (i.e. if Christ’s death wasn’t sufficient for their sins as well as the elect’s) then they wouldn’t be liable to be condemned for not believing in Him. They would just perish because of their sins not because they didn’t believe in Christ.

With regards to your Steve Jobs analogy you’ve said in effect that Steve Job’s provision of iPhones is sufficient for all but only those who want to own one can have one, but that’s the definition of unlimited iPhone supply, not a limited supply. So your analogy supports unlimited atonement not limited atonement.

 

[Hammster]

You said in a previous post that Christ’s atonement was sufficient for the whole world but efficient only for those who believe, and now you’ve just said that the opportunity to be saved is available to all men if they so desire, however this is the definition of unlimited atonement. You’re unwittingly supporting my position. What you’ve affirmed isn’t limited atonement. Limited atonement says Christ has only atoned for the sins of the elect and that it is impossible for the non-elect to be saved because they don’t have their sins forgiven through Christ’s atonement.

John 3:16-18 is talking about universal atonement for it says that unbelievers are condemned for not believing in Christ, and unbelievers can’t be damned for not believing in Christ if indeed Christ didn’t die for their sins. If Christ didn’t die for their sins (i.e. if Christ’s death wasn’t sufficient for their sins as well as the elect’s) then they wouldn’t be liable to be condemned for not believing in Him. They would just perish because of their sins not because they didn’t believe in Christ.

With regards to your Steve Jobs analogy you’ve said in effect that Steve Job’s provision of iPhones is sufficient for all but only those who want to own one can have one, but that’s the definition of unlimited iPhone supply, not a limited supply. So your analogy supports unlimited atonement not limited atonement.

The error in your thinking is that you see everything concerning salvation as talking about the atoning sacrifice of Christ. That isn't so. Election, for instance, isn't atonement. Justification isn't atonement. Etc.

If the bible says "whoever believes will be saved", it doesn't mean that the atonement had to be available to all just in case a non-elect person believes.

I think if you had a better grasp on unconditional election, your errors in trying to find unlimited atonement around every corner would go away.

 

[Hammster]

John 3:16-18 teaches this:

[16] “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. [18] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God".(ESV)

This teaches unlimited atonement. Those who don’t believe in Christ can’t be condemned for not believing in Him if in fact Christ didn’t die for them. If Christ didn’t atone for the sins of unbelievers then there would be no requirement for them to believe in Him because He wouldn’t have been sent to them as their Saviour. So "world" means everyone in the world and not just the elect, and the reason why people are damned as you can see is because they don't believe that Christ is their Saviour.

There's nothing about atonement in this passage. You are engaging in eisegesis.

 

[Hammster]

But the Messiah has appeared, high priest of the good things that have come. In the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands (that is, not of this creation ), He entered the most holy place once for all, not by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a young cow, sprinkling those who are defiled, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of the Messiah, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works to serve the living God? (Hebrews 9:11-14 HCSB)

I thought that looking at actual atonement passages would help.

Here we have the Great High Priest making atonement with His own perfect blood. Notice that it actually accomplishes something. It obtains eternal redemption, and it cleanses consciences. There is nothing potential or unlimited about it.

And yes, it does say "all". But in the context of who it was written to (Jews), it would need to be explained that this isn't like the old sacrificial system where it was limited to the Jews. It was now made for all, both Jews and Gentiles.

 

[shturt678]

The error in your thinking is that you see everything concerning salvation as talking about the atoning sacrifice of Christ. That isn't so. Election, for instance, isn't atonement. Justification isn't atonement. Etc.

If the bible says "whoever believes will be saved", it doesn't mean that the atonement had to be available to all just in case a non-elect person believes.

I think if you had a better grasp on unconditional election, your errors in trying to find unlimited atonement around every corner would go away.

Only one corner, eg, Rom.5:10a, "unlimited atonement," "Being enemies," we were reconciled to God." This is the object act. The instant Christ died the whole, whole and whole of sinners was changed completely. It was now a world for whose sin atonement had been made and no longer a world with unatoned sins. Hey, I know this pains your eyes and sincerely apologize.

Christ's atonement and the reckoning are valid for the universe of men. Owe! Trying to cushion this for you. Even all the damned in hell were thus reconciled to God. more pain. Not as men who were never reconciled are they damned, but as men who spurned God's reconciliation through Christ. You wouldn't be doing that would you? :o No longer will pain you, giving you a 'smoke break' for awhile so you can 'get it together' my friend, ie, head's up - will pop in later of course. Just your ol' old friend Jackster that really has no teeth

 

[Hammster]

Only one corner, eg, Rom.5:10a, "unlimited atonement," "Being enemies," we were reconciled to God." This is the object act. The instant Christ died the whole, whole and whole of sinners was changed completely. It was now a world for whose sin atonement had been made and no longer a world with unatoned sins. Hey, I know this pains your eyes and sincerely apologize.

Christ's atonement and the reckoning are valid for the universe of men. Owe! Trying to cushion this for you. Even all the damned in hell were thus reconciled to God. more pain. Not as men who were never reconciled are they damned, but as men who spurned God's reconciliation through Christ. You wouldn't be doing that would you? :o No longer will pain you, giving you a 'smoke break' for awhile so you can 'get it together' my friend, ie, head's up - will pop in later of course. Just your ol' old friend Jackster that really has no teeth

Romans 5:10 doesn't say what you want it to say. Paul has no intention of including every person who ever lived.

 

[Skala]

Only one corner, eg, Rom.5:10a, "unlimited atonement," "Being enemies," we were reconciled to God." This is the object act. The instant Christ died the whole, whole and whole of sinners was changed completely. It was now a world for whose sin atonement had been made and no longer a world with unatoned sins. Hey, I know this pains your eyes and sincerely apologize.

Christ's atonement and the reckoning are valid for the universe of men. Owe! Trying to cushion this for you. Even all the damned in hell were thus reconciled to God. more pain. Not as men who were never reconciled are they damned, but as men who spurned God's reconciliation through Christ. You wouldn't be doing that would you? :o No longer will pain you, giving you a 'smoke break' for awhile so you can 'get it together' my friend, ie, head's up - will pop in later of course. Just your ol' old friend Jackster that really has no teeth

That Christ would suffer and die for the sins of someone who God the Father would later throw into hell is unthinkable to me. Allow me to quote the beloved Spurgeon:

To think that my Savior died for men who were or are in hell, seems a supposition too horrible for me to entertain. To imagine for a moment that He was the Substitute for all the sons of men, and that God, having first punished the Substitute, afterwards punished the sinners themselves, seems to conflict with all my ideas of divine justice. That Christ should offer an atonement and satisfaction for the sins of all men, and that afterwards some of those very men should be punished for the sins for which Christ had already atoned, appears to me to be the most monstrous iniquity that could ever have been imputed to Saturn, to Janus, to the goddess of the Thugs, or to the most diabolical heathen deities. God forbid that we should ever think thus of Jehovah, the just and wise and good!