Why isn't the Limited Atonement Doctrine not taught anymore?

HITR · Nov 15, 2005

You still are not getting the point.

Yea, I am getting the point now just as well as I did then, regardless of what you try to assert. You see, I never said that the trinity was spelled out in clear language, as you continue insist, try as you might. I said that it is a rather clear indication of it. Find one place where I stated it was specifically stated and proven, and I will gladly recant. If you take an honest look, youll find that I said just this. It cant be proven and its not in explicit language.

As for semi-pelagian, this is merely a label slapped on men by other men. It is nothing to me. You can use your label in any way that pleases you. It, again, means absolutely nothing to me.

Now, before I even begin to address hypocrisy with you, Id ask you to either be specific in exactly where you see that Im not applying this across the board, or address the post about the many in terms of Romans 5:15 to be in unison with the many found in Matthew 20:28, using the same standard by which you expect of others. The must be able to reconcile, naturally, otherwise Scripture is contradicting Scripture. If you do not do this, then I would offer you a mirror in which to view the hypocrisy of which you claim to see.

Well, so far you have demonstrated that you employ the same free floating "principle" as the others here, so the conclusion I've reached is proven by your actions.

Your concluded opinion, respectfully, is of little credibility, and no consequence, to me. You know what I find equally as credible as our actions? The words of our mouth, for they betray the condition of our hearts.

Again, Im not interested in a game of ***-for-tat, thanks anyway! Im interested in discussing doctrine with my brethren.

In Him, HITR

Augustine_Was_Calvinist · Nov 15, 2005

HITR said:
Yea, I am getting the point now just as well as I did then, regardless of what you try to assert. You see, I never said that the trinity was spelled out in clear language, as you continue insist, try as you might. I said that it is a rather clear indication of it. Find one place where I stated it was specifically stated and proven, and I will gladly recant. If you take an honest look, youll find that I said just this. It cant be proven and its not in explicit language.

Yeah, and you turn around and expect cast iron literal, explicit language for Election and Limited Atonement. Which is why you use the same free floating non-principle as the other semi-pelagians.

HITR said:
As for semi-pelagian, this is merely a label slapped on men by other men. It is nothing to me. You can use your label in any way that pleases you. It, again, means absolutely nothing to me.

Semipelagian is a name for the philosophy you and the others you call "brethren" subscribe to.

Many passages for Limited Atonement, including the OT shadow and picture of Christ in Yom Kippur have been given, and you say that Limited Atonement is not in the Scripture. Yep, you do use the same double-minded interpretative non-principle as the other semi-pelagians.

kw5kw · Nov 15, 2005

Edial said:
Good.
Then you would certainly agree that when you state that "Christ died for many" you do not imply that he died only for a certain amount that is less than "all". Correct?

Ed

He could have died for 99.9% or he could have died for 0.01%, the idea is that he didn't die for every soul ever born! This is not a fact to cavil over, is it?

We, as humans, have no idea what the percentage is other than the fact the Bible indeed teaches us that Jesus did not die for all! Only the Father has prescience of this number.

It's a simple fact, so simple it's flying right over the thought patterns of many. It is that they persist in being obstreperous upon this trival persuit to which we have presented a superfluous amount of evidence.

HITR · Nov 15, 2005

Augustine_Was_Calvinist said:
[/font][/color]

Yeah, and you turn around and expect cast iron literal, explicit language for Election and Limited Atonement. Which is why you use the same free floating non-principle as the other semi-pelagians.

Quote just one place I did this, lest you be found to be a hypocrite. If you can find it, and quote it, I will, again, gladly recant. If not, are you equally willing to repent?

As for the rest, nothing is fruitful unless we are dealing with one another in the Spirit of the living God. That is not occurring here, so once again I bid you well. :wave:

Blessings, HITR

Augustine_Was_Calvinist · Nov 15, 2005

Edial said:
Atonement was for Israel, because the gospel was preached to Israel.

Wrong. Israel was given by God to be a "light to the Gentiles",
Isaiah 42:6
I, the LORD, have called You in righteousness, And will hold Your hand; I will keep You and give You as a covenant to the people, As a light to the Gentiles,

Isaiah 49:6
Indeed He says, It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob, And to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.

Where you fail is in not knowing the Scriptures.

And guess what, they did preach the gospel to Gentiles. How do you think Nebuchadnezzar came to be a believer in God?

As the Jews were scattered they took the gospel with them, just as the early church was scattered in persecution, they took the gospel with them.

Again, you fail in not knowing the Scriptures.

MeekOne · Nov 15, 2005

mlqurgw said:
I was wondering when the dispensationalists whould chime in.

BTW...don't label me...I am a follower of Christ and His Word. You heard a few sentences about what I had to say, and then you label me. Very limited minds label people, and don't try to pin me down with a label....its impossible. :wave:

Augustine_Was_Calvinist · Nov 15, 2005

HITR said:
Quote just one place I did this, lest you be found to be a hypocrite. If you can find it, and quote it, I will, again, gladly recant. If not, are you equally willing to repent?

As for the rest, nothing is fruitful unless we are dealing with one another in the Spirit of the living God. That is not occurring here, so once again I bid you well.

Blessings, HITR

You have said that Limited Atonement is nowhere in the Scriptures. Do you deny that?

We have proved you wrong.

You argue from the same stance as the other semi-pelagians. You need explicit, cast iron literal language to satisfy your philosophy, just as the others.

Augustine_Was_Calvinist · Nov 15, 2005

MeekOne said:
BTW...don't label me...I am a follower of Christ and His Word. You heard a few sentences about what I had to say, and then you label me. Very limited minds label people, and don't try to pin me down with a label....its impossible.

Dispensationalists is a shorthand way of identifying the theological construct that they subscribe too. Don't be offended by it. It is not used as a pejorative, but as a means of defining one's theological system.

kw5kw · Nov 15, 2005

MeekOne said:
BTW...don't label me...I am a follower of Christ and His Word. You heard a few sentences about what I had to say, and then you label me. Very limited minds label people, and don't try to pin me down with a label....its impossible.

Yea! My Sister is here... (I know you posted earlier, but this was the easiest one to reference to after typing all that earlier.)
:clap:

Sentry · Nov 15, 2005

Augustine_Was_Calvinist said:
Wrong. Israel was given by God to be a "light to the Gentiles",
Isaiah 42:6
I, the LORD, have called You in righteousness, And will hold Your hand; I will keep You and give You as a covenant to the people, As a light to the Gentiles,

Isaiah 49:6
Indeed He says, It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob, And to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.

Where you fail is in not knowing the Scriptures.

And guess what, they did preach the gospel to Gentiles. How do you think Nebuchadnezzar came to be a believer in God?

As the Jews were scattered they took the gospel with them, just as the early church was scattered in persecution, they took the gospel with them.

Again, you fail in not knowing the Scriptures.

It is you that fail.

For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. (Heb 9:15)

MeekOne · Nov 15, 2005

kw5kw said:
Yea! My Sister is here... (I know you posted earlier, but this was the easiest one to reference to after typing all that earlier.)

This is my brother, whom I love with all of the Love of Christ!

Augustine_Was_Calvinist · Nov 15, 2005

Edial said:
But he did not lay down his life ONLY for his sheep.

John 10:15
As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.

John 10:26
But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.

Jesus makes a clear distinction, non-believers are not His sheep. He lays down His life for His sheep, who are those who believe.

kw5kw · Nov 15, 2005

Augustine_Was_Calvinist said:
John 10:15
As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.

John 10:26
But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.

Jesus makes a clear distinction, non-believers are not His sheep. He lays down His life for His sheep, who are those who believe.

Bingo

MeekOne · Nov 15, 2005

kw5kw said:
Bingo

Bingo...awww...you called it first...you get the prize.

Augustine_Was_Calvinist · Nov 15, 2005

Edial said:
Atonement was for Israel, because the gospel was preached to Israel.
Then, as the Gentiles became included in the distribution of the Gospel so the Atonement became applicable.

So, in the NT the Atonement is for the Jews, and the Gentiles. ... yet many will reject him.

Thanks,
Ed

So, there was Limited Atonement in the OT and not the NT, eh?

Apparently you have never studied Romans.

Romans 1;

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible manand birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

Apparently you are not aware that the gospel was preached in Genesis 3.

Where do you think the pagan practice of sacrifice to appease their own gods came from?

It came from the proto-evangelium in Genesis 3.

HITR · Nov 15, 2005

Augustine_Was_Calvinist said:
You have said that Limited Atonement is nowhere in the Scriptures. Do you deny that?

I presume you have not found any such statement? It shouldn't be too hard to find, really. It's not like I have that many posts to search.

We have proved you wrong. You argue from the same stance as the other semi-pelagians. You need explicit, cast iron literal language to satisfy your philosophy, just as the others.

No, you haven't proven anything. Notwithstanding, it's not your job to prove anything to anyone. That is the work of the Spirit, and unless it's the Spirit speaking through you to reveal something to me, you're merely trying to do His job for Him. How's that working for ya? You think you know what I need? You don't even know, with certainty, a concrete fact of whether or not I ever made the claim you have repeatedly stated that I have. And this is something tangible that can be researched and proven. **shrug**

Truly, if you are unable to show me where I made such a claim, and are not willing to repent (see, one must be willing to repent, and that requires humility!), then I bid you well for the final time and will cease from fruitless discussions with you which only serve to try to boost egos and prove points. I'm not interested in any such thing as that. :wave:

God bless, HITR

Augustine_Was_Calvinist · Nov 15, 2005

JN 6:35 Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40 For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."

JN 6:41 At this the Jews began to grumble about him because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven." 42 They said, "Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, `I came down from heaven'?"

JN 6:43 "Stop grumbling among yourselves," Jesus answered. 44 "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.

Who did Jesus come for?
He came for Israel, the 12. He even stated so to one of the women.

How did you come to that absolutely ridiculous conclusion from that passage?

You read it into it is how. You allowed ignorant bias to lead you to read into the passage something that does not exist.

Edial said:
The questions that was asked is based on the fact that he came for Israel as defined in this text (I stated it by referring to "one of the women").

MT 15:24 He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."

So, because of this statement by Christ (please note the word "only") he came for the 12.
No one else was given to him outside of the 12. No one.
The others scattered.

Then he received the power after the resurrection.

Then he drew all men to himself.

Thanks,
Ed

That is a false corollary. The John passage applies to everyone whom the Father, and is defined as such because Jesus says He has sheep not of the fold of the Jews.

Between semi-pelagianism and dispensationalism you have learned how to twist the Scriptures into nonsense.

HITR · Nov 15, 2005

kw5kw, thank you much for the response. It really didn't answer my question, but I believe that's probably on account of my not being clear enough, I apologize. Unfortunately, I'm out of time and have to scoot. I'll be back a bit later, and I'll try to clarify my question a bit better for you. Then, perhaps, I can come to a better of understanding of what you believe. I just didn't want to leave your reply without any response.

Until then, may you be richly blessed in Him!

In His care, HITR

Sentry · Nov 15, 2005

Augustine_Was_Calvinist said:
John 10:15
As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.

John 10:26
But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.

Jesus makes a clear distinction, non-believers are not His sheep. He lays down His life for His sheep, who are those who believe.

Did Jesus lay down his life before or after you believed?

kw5kw · Nov 15, 2005

Sentry said:
Did Jesus lay down his life before or after you believed?

In man's time it was 2000 years ago, so naturally it was before any of us were born -- in man's time.

In God's time, all time is the same, as He created all things, including time, so the question is irrevilant. (sp)

Why isn't the Limited Atonement Doctrine not taught anymore?

Hand Crafted

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Hand Crafted

Well-Known Member

Meek is not weak

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Meek is not weak

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Meek is not weak

Well-Known Member

Hand Crafted

Well-Known Member

Hand Crafted

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Similar threads