Limited atonement !

fhansen said:

There are difficulties with either view, far less with unlimited atonement. And I don't believe in UR in the sense that all will be saved at the end, of course.

1. Universal redemption would make the blood of Christ of none effect. It says that the blood of Christ did not actually accomplish and secure anything, but only made certain things possible.

God's the Boss, and can choose, accordng to His wisdom and for man's highest good, to incorporate man's will into determining his eternal destiny, rather than just produce automatons which He could've done at the beginning, in which case, BTW, no sin, with all the suffering that resulted, would've occured and no revelation, no bible, no knowledge given to man, would've even been necessary- as God just does it all anyway in that senario, at least for some.

2. Universal redemption would destroy the love of God. It makes God’s love meaningless and changeable. Does God at one time love a man enough to slay his own Son for him and at another time hate that man enough to send him to hell?

Love is the highest good in the universe, the true measure of man's justice/righteousness and the nature of God, Himself. And love is, necessarily, a choice for man, both a gift and a choice. And yet love won't force itself upon us, or cause us to reciprocate; it requires freedom in order to exist. And love would never predestine anyone to hell but is patient and kind. "It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres" (1 Cor 13:7). It's "patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" (2 Pet 3:9).

3. Universal redemption would destroy the justice of God. Where is the justice of God if he can punish the same offense twice, once in Christ and again in the soul for whom Christ died?

The justice of God is revealed when He judges us on what we did with His redemption and the grace entailed in that, on how we've loved in return to put it best.

4. Universal redemption would destroy the wisdom of God, What wisdom can there be in God devising a plan to save every person in the world, when he knew that in the end that plan would fail?

The author left out a key component. God's wise plan, again, incorporates man's free response to grace, his yes" instead of "no".

5. Universal redemption would rob God of his glory in saving sinners. if, after all, it is my faith rather than Christ’s blood that redeems my soul, why should I give him the praise?

It's a cooperative effort, by His wise discretion. Man cannot possibly move himself to God; man is lost and wouldn't know where to look, sick and in need of being healed, dead and in need of being wakened. But he can still resist and reject being moved by God, being found, being healed, being raised. And it's a work in progress, man can still fail to remain in Him (John 15:5), he can fail to put to death the deeds of the flesh (Rom 8:12-14), he can turn back away from God. He can turn out to be poor soil. So, of course we praise Him. We couldn't possibly do it apart from Him. In fact, "Apart from Me you can do nothing" (John 15:5). We're here to learn that vital fact, so that we might turn, and be healed, so that we might be grafted into the Vine. That union, entered into via faith, is salvation.

6. Universal redemption would make the death of Christ a vain thing. If one soul perishes for whom Christ died, to that extent he died in vain.

None could be saved without His death.

7. Universal redemption would provide a sinner with no motive to love and serve Christ. If he loved me no more than he loved Judas, why should I love him any more than Judas did? Why should I serve him?

What difference would it possibly make what Judas did? I found and chose the true treasure. I valued and responded to God's love, loving Him in return. I'd much rather know that God loves all rather than being caprious and whimsical regarding who He loves and who He saves.

Click to expand...

Spiritual Jew said:

Your lame one liner responses are useless. How about actually addressing what was said in the post? Is that too much trouble for you? Do you have any thoughts at all about what he said in his thoughtful post?

Click to expand...

fhansen said:

Well, yer welcome to yer opinion of course, but I’d classify this Fortner fellow as being in much deeper pitfalls, not to mention silliness.

Click to expand...

Spiritual Jew said:

You are addressing nothing. When your doctrine is put under scrutiny, you are clearly not prepared to defend it.

Click to expand...

Spiritual Jew said:

LOL. Is that what you call your weak arguments that don't take context into account and don't take all of scripture into account? You see that as a case of your doctrine being defended? I don't think so.


I have, but you are not able to see that because you're brainwashed.

Click to expand...

Spiritual Jew said:

Of course you won't admit it, but I have proven it wrong. Scripture is very clear that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:1-2) including the false teachers and prophets who Peter said denied the Lord who bought them (2 Peter 2:1). That you won't admit it doesn't change that I have proven limited atonement wrong with scripture. You are obviously very stubborn and believe what you want to believe regardless of what you are shown.

Click to expand...

David Lamb said:

Yet Jesus said:

““I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.” (Joh 10:11 NKJV)

Not, "The good shepherd gives His life for the whole world."

Later on in the same chapter, He tells some of His hearers that they are not of His sheep:

““But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.” (Joh 10:26 NKJV)

Click to expand...

Spiritual Jew said:

LOL. If scripture isn't enough to convince you, then nothing can.

Click to expand...