Limited vs unlimited atonement?

[Marvin Knox]

You have brought up a legitimate challenge here. No other points in the doctrine of grace lacks direct Scriptural backing than Limited Atonement. I think that we could show that there are a great many that could be used to infer that this point is in line with Scripture, but the effort may prove noneffective.

Before I forget, this is a ink to the thinking of 4 point Calvinist Bruce Ware.

The link is to an Arminian website and as such contains the obligatory comments about Calvinism in general. But one can ignore tht fact and still glean some understanding of the position of at least some 4 pointers such as Ware, John Calvin, and me.

Bruce A. Ware, “Extent of the Atonement”

I think we should start with the question: Did Christ offer up Himself a sacrifice for the whole human race, or did His death have special reference to God's chosen elect?

Both according to the scriptures as I see it.

Our stance is that Christ did not merely intend to make salvation possible for all men, but rather for those who had been given to Him by the Father.

Without the caveat "but rather" I would agee with this. IMO it was both.

We further state that while Christ died for the elect only, His death has incidental reference to others in so far as they are partakers of common grace.

Again - withou the caveat "Christ died for the elect only" - I agree.

The need: We believe that the requirement for salvation as originally intended is perfect obedience. We know that Adam failed in his test, and brought upon fall of all mankind. God still demands perfect obedience in order that we might have eternal life. But there are many obstacles that prevent us from achieving this on our own.

Absolutely.

Atonement: Most would agree that the atonement is the forgiveness of sins. But there is a little more depth to that, and more to what the atonement does. In ancient Israel, atonement was achieved by the constant sacrifice of animals. There was nothing permanent in their work, and even after adhering to the sacrificial laws they didn't achieve what was necessary. Christ's perfect obedience in life afforded a ransom for the debt of every sin of the individual the atonement is applied to through His one death. Additionally the application of the atonement affords a permanent change to the heart of the individual, allowing them the faith necessary to believe in the saving works just applied to them. Even more still also His righteousness is imputed to the individual so that the sinful nature would be hidden upon entering Heaven, and we would be seen without blemish in eternity.

The key here is the term "application of the atonement".

Which goes to my point. The shed blood of Jesus Christ in and of itself doesn't "apply" the atonement to the life of any individual until they believe unto salvtion.

A person can have had the atoning blood shed for him and still remain a "child of wrath". In fact that IMO the lot in life of every individual who we preach to - elect or not.

That is of course the Arminian position. It is also my position and the position of the scriptures as I read them.

Arminians are wrong about a great many things (as are the Pelagians - in spades) but this isn't one of them.

Election: If from eternity God has planned to save one portion of the human race, it would seem to be a contradiction to say that the work of Christ has equal reference to all men, or to say that Christ died for those whom He passed over. If God has elected some, then the primary purpose of Christ's work was to redeem those elect.

He did plan that from eternity.

It was one of the purposes of God (maybe even the most important). But it was not necessarily the only purpose.

Purpose: We would agree that the value of the atonement is sufficient to save all of mankind, it is however also efficient to save the elect. Because of the sinner's own inability either to understand or desire the things of God, the application of the atonement is paramount in those that are to believe. If we say that this atonement is applied to all, and some are not made believers then either man's will is greater than God's or the atonement has no power to save anyone. On the same token, why God would save some and not all, we cannot say. This is the difficulty of this particular doctrine.

Again - the key there is "the application of the atonement". That application does not take place until saving faith is exercised in the life of the elect.

Until that time they are "children of wrath even as the rest" of mankind.

No faith - no application.

No election and irresistible grace - no faith

That happens to be the Arminian position (and let's not forget FreeGrace). But I can't help that.

Just because they aren't Reformed does not mean they can't be right about anything.

In like manner, just because we are Reformed does not mean that we can't be wrong about something.

Incidentally - it's nice to discuss these things with someone who doesn't feel that they have to treat me like an enemy just to somehow maintain their Calvinist cridentials before other Calvinists.

As a Reformed (or Calvinist) believer we have undoubtedly both suffered the vitriol tossed our way from those who disagree with us - be they Arminians of various stripes or out and out Pelagians.

It's interesting that they justify their nasty attitude toward Calvinists because (they say) Calvinists are so smug and nasty toward them. They see something in Calvinists which most Calvinists themselves are blind to - namely their superior attitude and nasty dismissal of other's views.

I suppose you could say that I have been blessed to be able to see exactly why they feel that way about Calvinists - having undergone myself for many years (and here in this current thread) the uncalled for judgments and nasty slings and arrows of Calvinsts.

If I must bear their judgmental attitude for daring to discuss the fact that one letter of TULIP might be uncalled for ---- I can only imagine how Arminians feel about discussing their great many differences with Calvinists.

How can some Calvinists expect to have a meaningful discussion with the majority of Christendom about the doctrines of grace when they can't even carry on a civil conversation with a fellow Reformed believer over one point without making things personal?

God bless you brother!

 

[redleghunter]

Please explain how someone who does not remain in Christ, somehow still has eternal life?

Your post flows logically.

Honest question based on the above...What does it mean to remain or not remain in Christ? That seems to be the bazillion dollar question on these chat forums. Usually (not you) we hear we have to go to some blog site or hear some preacher's video to find out, if the price is right.

However, I pose this question in general. What is threshold/measurement of being 'out of tolerance' and thus not 'remaining in Christ?' It's an honest question, not a gotcha type hyperbole on my part. I am very curious.

 

[Marvin Knox]

I understand what you are saying about the presentation of the gospel Marvin. But what we mean and understand about the gospel is completely different from an Arminian or a pelagian or a papist or a JW and so on.

The trouble, as I see it, is that you automatically lump all those who are not 5-point Calvinists in with the cults and pelagians who do not believe in the need for the blood sacrifice.

That isn' necessary IMO.

So these truths must be taught with great patience when presenting the gospel message.

I certainly believe in presenting proper doctrine at all times and not water it down as a teacher.

But the strong meat of doctrines like election and predestination and such has no place in the call for repentance to the world.

Without the help of God the world is not able to even understand the very basics such as believing unto justification - let along advanced doctrines.

Nor is the new born babe ready to digest some of these strong doctrines of grace even if they are true (and most are).

This discussion of the validity of the doctrine of limited atonement is and should remain an intramural discussion among brothers in order that we can refine for the purpose of teaching others what is and what is not accurate doctrine.

Charges that people who don't believe in limited atonement do not understand what the gospel is and that they are somehow presenting something that is not the gospel to the world - are unfounded.

A great many people who believe the other doctrines of grace and subscribe to the absolute sovereignty of God and other Reformed doctrines do not subscribe to limited atonement.

Granted that it is a stretch to leave one's comfort zone and consider that one of the points of the vaunted TULIP might be an uncalled for overreach of both logic and scriptural support.

But my arguments from logic and scripture are quite sound and all I ask is that it be shown where they are not.

A single scripture which teaches limited atonement over against the great many which teach unlimited atonement shouldn't be too much to ask.

Showing how logic demands that people for whom Christ died and are not drawn to faith by God by grace cannot remain children of wrath (even as we were) for eternity is a simple request which I have merely asked someone to show me.

And as far as Calvin goes about this topic of limited atonement, I see no proof that he held to unlimited atonement as an Arminian would view it. I understand this is a debate whether he did or not. But his stance on the doctrines of grace causes me to disagree, although certain writings of him may hint that he did on the surface hold to an unlimited view. But that in no way solidifies that he did.

Agreed.

Which is all the more reason to stop calling the 5-points "Calvinism".

Why not call TULIP for what it is - "5 points which counter The 5 Articles Of Arminian Remonstrance"?

As it is many say that those who do not subscribe to all 5 points cannot rightfully call themselves Calvinists.

Then they stretch that position to say that those who do not subscribe to all 5 points aren't even Reformed.

Then the error is compounded by many saying that all 5 points and nothing less than all 5 points are the gospel.

Then to top it all off many charge that those who do not include all 5 points in their presentation of the call to the world to believe (or at least very shortly thereafter) are preaching a false gospel.


Nice to see us discussing again withut such charges and judgments as before. Hope we can keep it up.

Or - we can just drop the entire discussion as you wish brother.

 

[redleghunter]

That is right they don't have eternal life, if they do not abide in the True Vine.
Who really is Jesus Christ and what did Christ do? Well one thing is He made everything that exists, including all mankind. Since the life Christ gives is eternal and He says they never perish, so that must be a truthism, well I take the John 15 verses as Christ referring to Himself as the Creator. So if they do not abide in God (Christ), then they don't have eternal life.

6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

But to not abide in Christ and to be cast off the True Vine does not mean they once did abide in Christ. For someone to be cast off as a dead branch speaks to them not having any life in Christ, so yes Christ created all men as their Creator. But if they have no home in the True Vine they are going to be denied life with God in heaven since they offend God and are lawless.

Study the parable of the wheat and the tares to see this.
Matthew 13:41
The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness,

I noticed over the years John 15:3 does not get much 'play time' in the Vine discourse. I think that is an important verse which sets up the rest to understand.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
"No, I would not. The Bible says that God has revealed Himself to everyone through creation, revealing His eternal power and divine nature, so that no one has any excuse for not glorifying Him as God and being thankful to Him. Rom 1:19,20"

1. Some have received an internal call.

2. Some have not received an internal call.

I haven't found evidence for internal and external calls. I see them as ways to explain reformed doctrines.

3. All are without excuse.

Correct.

4. Therefore those who did not received an internal call are without excuse.

Incorrect. Rom 1:20 says all are without excuse. But if one didn't receive "the" call, that would be an excuse.

As you correctly pointed out before - all are without excuse.

But if God chooses who will believe, then those not chosen have an excuse.

Limited atonement is a Calvinistic stretch of both the scriptures and good logic.

Correct.

All are sinners and will be punished for their sins.

Did not Christ pay the penalty for all sins?

All are without excuse now.

Because Christ purchased the gift of eternal life for everyone and gives that gift freely to all who believe in Him for it.

All will be without excuse in eternity.

For reasons just noted.

 

[redleghunter]

This Wikipedia article says unlimited atonement doesn't mean Jesus paid for the sins of unbelievers. If that is true, there is no difference between limited and unlimited atonement in my opinion.

It is a matter of perspective. On the one hand our human minds pondering. On the other a Sovereign God.

 

[EmSw]

To be clear, I'm no Arminian, but it's more like this:
For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. Titus 2:11

Is there a problem with that?

Maybe the problem is with this, then:
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16

Neither passage says anything about a sacrifice, nor blood.

 

[redleghunter]

Just like the plant that spouted and grew up for a while, but never produced fruit, because they stopped believing.

I believe it had to do with the make up of the soil in the parable of the soils.

Only God can change the 'make up' of the soil.

"I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh." (Ezekiel 36:26)

 

[redleghunter]

Because of the sinner's own inability either to understand or desire the things of God, the application of the atonement is paramount in those that are to believe. If we say that this atonement is applied to all, and some are not made believers then either man's will is greater than God's or the atonement has no power to save anyone. On the same token, why God would save some and not all, we cannot say. This is the difficulty of this particular doctrine.

Very informative as I am studying Exodus this week. The parallels with Exodus 12 is quite striking.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Neither passage says anything about a sacrifice, nor blood.

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.

So now, you're going to have to reject the Beloved disciple's writings, just as you've done with Paul's, Peter's, who complemented Paul's writings, and the book of Hebrews. All of which have directly refuted your unbiblical notions.

 

[St_Worm2]

Hello David. It's not a question that sins could have been remitted by repentance in the OT, it's a fact. You and I can both read it for ourselves.

Hi Em, like I said in my earlier post, the animal sacrifices were only part of what was required, but they were required nevertheless. And just because they are not mentioned directly in the verses you're attempting to use to make your point, doesn't mean they weren't required either

2 Chronicles 7:14
...if My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.

No sacrifice of an animal was required in the above passage. What was required was humility, prayer, seeking God, turning from their wicked ways, then God said He will forgive their sin.

Actually, that's not true. Let's take a look at the passage that 2 Chronicles 7:14 is found in.

2 Chronicles 7​

​

The Shekinah Glory​

1 Now when Solomon had finished praying, fire came down from heaven and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices, and the glory of the LORD filled the house.
2 The priests could not enter into the house of the LORD because the glory of the LORD filled the LORD’S house.
3 All the sons of Israel, seeing the fire come down and the glory of the LORD upon the house, bowed down on the pavement with their faces to the ground, and they worshiped and gave praise to the LORD, saying, “Truly He is good, truly His lovingkindness is everlasting.”

Sacrifices Offered​

4 Then the king and all the people offered sacrifice before the LORD.
5 King Solomon offered a sacrifice of 22,000 oxen and 120,000 sheep. Thus the king and all the people dedicated the house of God.
6 The priests stood at their posts, and the Levites also, with the instruments of music to the LORD, which King David had made for giving praise to the LORD—“for His lovingkindness is everlasting”—whenever he gave praise by their means, while the priests on the other side blew trumpets; and all Israel was standing.
7 Then Solomon consecrated the middle of the court that was before the house of the LORD, for there he offered the burnt offerings and the fat of the peace offerings because the bronze altar which Solomon had made was not able to contain the burnt offering, the grain offering and the fat.

The Feast of Dedication​

8 So Solomon observed the feast at that time for seven days, and all Israel with him, a very great assembly who came from the entrance of Hamath to the brook of Egypt.
9 On the eighth day they held a solemn assembly, for the dedication of the altar they observed seven days and the feast seven days.
10 Then on the twenty-third day of the seventh month he sent the people to their tents, rejoicing and happy of heart because of the goodness that the LORD had shown to David and to Solomon and to His people Israel.

God’s Promise and Warning​

11 Thus Solomon finished the house of the LORD and the king’s palace, and successfully completed all that he had planned on doing in the house of the LORD and in his palace.
12 Then the LORD appeared to Solomon at night and said to him, “I have heard your prayer and have chosen this place for Myself as a house of sacrifice.
13 “If I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or if I command the locust to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among My people,
14 and My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land.​

Madalyn Murray O'Hair, the famous atheist, said that one of the reasons she was an atheist was because EVEN THE BIBLE SAYS, "There is no God". You know what, she's right, the Bible does say that, several times in fact, but is that what it means? Here's one of the verses she's talking about:

Psalm 14
1 The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds;
There is no one who does good.
​

Context, as they say, is everything in most cases

BTW, a BIG part of being "humble" before God means that we choose to be obedient before Him and lovingly submit to doing what He commands us to do. In Israel, that certainly included His commands to sacrifice animals for the remission of sins.

So again, 2 Chronicles 7:14 doesn't exist in a vacuum Em, it has to exist alongside the passage and chapter we find it in .. as well as the entire Bible. Just because v14 doesn't talk directly about Israel's animal sacrifices doesn't mean they weren't commanded by God, as the rest of the passage and chapter (as well the rest of the Bible) makes perfectly clear!

So my question to you remains unanswered, if what you believe is true, why did God command Israel to make all of those sacrifices

And where Jesus and the NT are concerned, if all that you believe/teach is true, then why the Incarnation, and why the Cross

Look, when you choose to do what you've done (here and elsewhere in many of your posts), you end up assigning a different meaning to the words of the Bible than God intended them to have, and by doing that, you make Him out to be different Person/God than He really is. You've created your own false narrative, and in doing so, your own religion, and your own god (what's that called again ________________ ?), because either the Bible and the orthodox Christian faith are true ... or you are!

Both cannot be true

In Christ,
David

"The Son of Man did not come to be served,
but to serve, and to give His life
as a ransom for many"
Mark 10:45
​

 

[Marvin Knox]

I haven't found evidence for internal and external calls. I see them as ways to explain reformed doctrines.

"No one can come to me except the Fathr draw him."

It is obvious from both scripture examples such as Paul and our various life experiences as well that all are not acted upon equally in this life.

That's why we pray that the Lord will open the eyes of loved ones we are trying to lead to the Lord.

1. Some have received an internal call.
2. Some have not received an internal call.
3. All are without excuse.
4. Therefore those who did not received an internal call are without excuse.

Incorrect. Rom 1:20 says all are without excuse. But if one didn't receive "the" call, that would be an excuse.
But if God chooses who will believe, then those not chosen have an excuse.

You need to revisit the principles of logic.

I laid it out so that it can not be refuted by good logic.

Did not Christ pay the penalty for all sins?

Yes. Joining Him in His paying that penalty through the wrath of God - because of ones lack of belief unto salvation - is what I believe is happening with unbelievers in eternity.

This is an area where we could spend an entire thread. I can imagine what most of your arguments toward me would be. I am not willing to enter into that discussion on this thread.

Because Christ purchased the gift of eternal life for everyone and gives that gift freely to all who believe in Him for it.

You won't get any argument from me on that.

 

[EmSw]

Hi Em, like I said in my earlier post, the animal sacrifices were only part of what was required, but they were required nevertheless. And just because they are not mentioned directly in the verses you're attempting to use to make your point, doesn't mean they weren't required either

Well David, I guess we will dig a little more to see about those sacrifices you brought up. If we read chapter 6, along with chapter 7, we can get a little insight to the sacrifices and offerings.

In chapter 6, we also see how the Lord forgives. Let's have a look.

20 that Your eyes may be open toward this temple day and night, toward the place where You said You would put Your name, that You may hear the prayer which Your servant makes toward this place.
21 And may You hear the supplications of Your servant and of Your people Israel, when they pray toward this place. Hear from heaven Your dwelling place, and when You hear, forgive.

Note the absence of a sin offering or sacrifice; however, we do have supplication of the people in prayer. Supplication meaning being gracious, having favor, and pity, and also to be shown grace, favor, and pity. Surely, if any sacrifices were important, it would be included, don't you think?

24 “Or if Your people Israel are defeated before an enemy because they have sinned against You, and return and confess Your name, and pray and make supplication before You in this temple,
25 then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of Your people Israel, and bring them back to the land which You gave to them and their fathers.

Now we do see this is talking about the people sinning against God. But once again, we don't see any offering nor sacrifice required by God. What is said is returning, confessing, praying, and making supplication.

26 “When the heavens are shut up and there is no rain because they have sinned against You, when they pray toward this place and confess Your name, and turn from their sin because You afflict them,
27 then hear in heaven, and forgive the sin of Your servants...

And again, we read about the forgiveness of God's servants. And again, nothing about offerings nor sacrifices. What is required is prayer, confession, and turning from their sin.

28 “When there is famine in the land, pestilence or blight or mildew, locusts or grasshoppers; when their enemies besiege them in the land of their cities; whatever plague or whatever sickness there is;
29 whatever prayer, whatever supplication is made by anyone, or by all Your people Israel, when each one knows his own burden and his own grief, and spreads out his hands to this temple:
30 then hear from heaven Your dwelling place, and forgive, and give to everyone according to all his ways...

Do you see the pattern developing? We read about prayer, supplication, the people spreading out his hands to the temple (which represents Jesus). Nothing is said about any offerings nor sacrifices. Finally, we read this concerning sin -

36 “When they sin against You (for there is no one who does not sin), and You become angry with them and deliver them to the enemy, and they take them captive to a land far or near;
37 yet when they come to themselves in the land where they were carried captive, and repent, and make supplication to You in the land of their captivity, saying, ‘We have sinned, we have done wrong, and have committed wickedness’;
38 and when they return to You with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their captivity, where they have been carried captive, and pray toward their land which You gave to their fathers, the city which You have chosen, and toward the temple which I have built for Your name:
39 then hear from heaven Your dwelling place their prayer and their supplications, and maintain their cause, and forgive Your people who have sinned against You.

Notice the people come to themselves (much like the prodigal son), repent, make supplication, confess their sins, and return to God. And once again, we read that God does not require any sacrifices nor offerings.

Now, as far as the offerings and sacrifices mentioned in chapter 7, we see they were for the dedication and consecration of the new temple. We don't read anywhere these were for sin offerings.

BTW, a BIG part of being "humble" before God means that we choose to be obedient before Him and lovingly submit to doing what He commands us to do. In Israel, that certainly included His commands to sacrifice animals for the remission of sins.

Actually David, grace is given to the humble. Yes, grace was a part of salvation in the OT. And yes, it means we choose to be obedient before Him and submit to doing what He commands. According to Jesus, it is keeping His commandments and doing what He says.

Furthermore, you will not see Jesus saying to offer animal sacrifices anywhere, especially for the remission of sins. However, we do read He says to repent for the remission of sins.

Do you remember Jesus saying He has power on earth to forgive sins? Well, He forgave many sins while on this earth, and without any blood nor sacrifices. His command was to repent, not offer any animal for the remission of sins.

So again, 2 Chronicles 7:14 doesn't exist in a vacuum Em, it has to exist alongside the passage and chapter we find it in .. as well as the entire Bible. Just because v14 doesn't talk directly about Israel's animal sacrifices doesn't mean they weren't commanded by God, as the rest of the passage and chapter (as well the rest of the Bible) makes perfectly clear!

Jesus made it perfectly clear it was repentance which remitted sin, not a sacrifice. And I am 100% sure, Jesus knew what He was speaking about. Don't you?

So my question to you remains unanswered, if what you believe is true, why did God command Israel to make all of those sacrifices

And where Jesus and the NT are concerned, if all that you believe/teach is true, then why the Incarnation, and why the Cross

Look, when you choose to do what you've done (here and elsewhere in many of your posts), you end up assigning a different meaning to the words of the Bible than God intended them to have, and by doing that, you make Him out to be different Person/God than He really is. You've created your own false narrative, and in doing so, your own religion, and your own god (what's that called again ________________ ?), because either the Bible and the orthodox Christian faith are true ... or you are!

Both cannot be true

In Christ,
David

I will answer the rest later, David. Thanks.

 

[EmSw]

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.

So now, you're going to have to reject the Beloved disciple's writings, just as you've done with Paul's, Peter's, who complemented Paul's writings, and the book of Hebrews. All of which have directly refuted your unbiblical notions.

Nope, I'm not going to reject it. You need to reject that translation; the word is not 'sacrifice'.

 

[JLB777]

I believe it had to do with the make up of the soil in the parable of the soils.

Only God can change the 'make up' of the soil.

"I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh." (Ezekiel 36:26)

Brother, God doesn't do the believing for us, it the choice of each individual.

The condition that is required for one to be saved is to believe.

12 Those by the wayside are the ones who hear; then the devil comes and takes away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. Luke 8:12

• lest they should believe and be saved.

Believe = Saved


Those in the second example, who believe for a while, do so because they are persecuted by unbelieving Jews to turn back to Judaism, a religion that does not believe Jesus is Messiah and Lord, in which they must turn away from Christ Jesus and faith in Him.

That is what Jesus is teaching His disciples and those who would believe and have faith in Him, that they must continue to believe to the end to be saved.


Matthew records it this way:

20 But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; 21 yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles. Matthew 13:20-21

and again

But he who endures to the end shall be saved. Matthew 24:13


Hebrews teaches it this way:

4 For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God. 5 And Moses indeed was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which would be spoken afterward, 6 but Christ as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm to the end. Hebrews 3:4-6


and again


12 Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God; 13 but exhort one another daily, while it is called “Today,” lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end, Hebrews 3;12-14



JLB

 

[JLB777]

People use the John 15 verses to say a saved person can lose their salvation.
The being 'cast out' as a withered branch that Jesus mentions which is then burned in the fire.
Sure this is eternal destruction, but Jesus also says this about those who believe.

John 5
24 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

Christ gives eternal life only to believers, and yes believers must persevere to the end to be saved, that is continue in belief, else they are proven to be antichrists as apostle John says in 1 John 2, which means they were frauds, which means they never really were believers at all. A person can say all sorts of things and not really understand his own self when it comes to spirituality. They are like the seed strewn along the rocky path, which when troubles arise because of the WORD, they fall away since they have no root in their life, and the root here is being born of God in Christ, they were never born of God at all.

For
1 John 5New King James Version (NKJV)
1 Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him.

2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments.

3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.

4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith.

5 Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

Those who depart from the faith to follow demonic doctrines or have evil unbelieving hearts that depart from the living God, have not been born of God at any time in their short life on the earth, else they would have continued in the faith since it is God who preserves them.

1 Peter 1, mentions that it is God's mercy that we are born again, and we are kept by the power of God through faith. So you can see your salvation is entirely dependent on the power of God at work in your life. God giving to them the gift of faith. Romans 12:3

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

Jesus taught us that we must continue to believe to the end, even under persecution, in order to be saved.

We can not renounce or turn away from Christ, in which we depart from Him and still think we have the eternal life we once had when we were connected to Him, as a branch is connected the vine in which it draws "life" from the vine that allows it to produce fruit.

The condition that is required for one to be saved is to believe.

12 Those by the wayside are the ones who hear; then the devil comes and takes away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. Luke 8:12

• lest they should believe and be saved.

Believe = Saved


Those in the second example, who believe for a while, do so because they are persecuted by unbelieving Jews to turn back to Judaism, a religion that does not believe Jesus is Messiah and Lord, in which they must turn away from Christ Jesus and faith in Him.

That is what Jesus is teaching His disciples and those who would believe and have faith in Him, that they must continue to believe to the end to be saved.


Matthew records it this way:

20 But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; 21 yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles. Matthew 13:20-21

and again

But he who endures to the end shall be saved. Matthew 24:13


Hebrews teaches it this way:

4 For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God. 5 And Moses indeed was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which would be spoken afterward, 6 but Christ as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm to the end. Hebrews 3:4-6


and again


12 Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God; 13 but exhort one another daily, while it is called “Today,” lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end, Hebrews 3;12-14






JLB

 

[St_Worm2]

Believed = Saved

The demons "believe" in God, and they shudder .. James 2:19. Are demons "saved"?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
"I haven't found evidence for internal and external calls. I see them as ways to explain reformed doctrines."

"No one can come to me except the Fathr draw him."

Correct. And the next verse explains who it is that comes to the Son.

It is obvious from both scripture examples such as Paul and our various life experiences as well that all are not acted upon equally in this life.

I wouldn't expect that to be true anyway. I don't need an internal or external call to explain it.

That's why we pray that the Lord will open the eyes of loved ones we are trying to lead to the Lord.

Since Rom 1:19-20 says that no one has any excuse, my prayer is that the Lord will lead a person to the one I'm praying for with the opportunity to share the gospel.

I said this:
" Rom 1:20 says all are without excuse. But if one didn't receive "the" call, that would be an excuse.
But if God chooses who will believe, then those not chosen have an excuse."

You need to revisit the principles of logic.

Not sure how my comment violates principles of logic. Please clarify.

I laid it out so that it can not be refuted by good logic.

I laid it out to show how an excuse is created by the idea that God chooses who will believe.

 

[JLB777]

Believed = Saved

The demons "believe" in God, and they shudder .. James 2:19. Are demons "saved" (or do they shudder because they know they are not)?

They believe but do not confess Jesus as Lord, which is the action or work or obedience that is required for faith to be able to save.

18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. James 2:18-24


Key Phrase: faith without works is dead?

Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? James 2:21

• The works being referred to here is obedience.

Faith, without the corresponding action or work of obedience is dead.

This is the principle or law of faith, and how faith works.


Concerning our initial salvation, the corresponding action of obedience to the Gospel is to repent.


Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.

Repent is the action that shows we believe.


The way we repent is to confess Jesus as Lord.

Repent means to turn to God.

If you are called to turn to God, then by default you are called to turn from Satan as your lord.

The way that your express this obedience of faith, concerning the Gospel is to confess Jesus as Lord.

This is what grants the believer/obeyer of the Gospel, the forgiveness of sins.


9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Romans 10:9-10

• and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Concerning what James teaches us, that faith without works is dead, the works he is mentioning is obedience; the corresponding act of obedience.

Works = the effort obedience requires.


Devils may believe Jesus is Lord, but they still serve Satan and confess Him as Lord by their actions.



JLB

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
"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.

So now, you're going to have to reject the Beloved disciple's writings, just as you've done with Paul's, Peter's, who complemented Paul's writings, and the book of Hebrews. All of which have directly refuted your unbiblical notions."

Nope, I'm not going to reject it. You need to reject that translation; the word is not 'sacrifice'.

The Greek word is 'hilasmos'. My lexicons indicate it means 'atonement'.

Other translations have "propitiation". The Greek word means atonement.