Limited atonement, presbyterian view and Catholic critique.

[Cassian]

After reading through this thread, though it is still short, there has been no mention of the Incarnation of Christ. It may have been assumed but a understanding of the Incarnation is pertinent here as it will answer the questions raised.
Christ assumed our human nature in every respect that we are human, but because He was Incarnate His nature was not subject to corruption and death. (He gave up His life on the Cross) Man was created from the elements of this earth thus man is an consubstantial with the earth. Thus when Adam sinned the consequence of that sin was corruption and death to man and the world.

When Christ assumed our nature, was slain, but was raised from death we all will be raised from death.
Christ accomplished two things by His death and resurrection. Most importantly, he restored mankind to an eternal existence again. He reconciled the word to God. Col 1:20. II Cor 5:18-19, Heb 2:14-16, Heb 2:9 and several others.

Secondly, He provided atonement for sin. He was the sacrifice for sin. One drop of blood is sufficient for the whole world, all sins . Some, it seems, think that Christ forgave sins from the Cross, He did not. Some also think that individuals were saved from the Cross. Christ's work was universal (salvation) from death and sin for the world/mankind, reconciling the world to God.

Regarding death, immortality will be imposed upon us since we are all bear the human nature which was raised from death, He defeated death. You have tests such as I Cor 15:12-22, I Cor 15:53. and others that state all the dead will be raised.
Sacrifice for sin. No longer will man need to kill animals for their blood, Christ was the one time sacrifice for sin.
Now the world has been returned to a state where man is now in the same position as Adam was before the fall. The only difference we bear mortal natures which he did not have. We sin because we are mortal - I Cor 15:56. We now will be able to choose life or death, same as He.
Christ is now our High Priest in the Heavens. When we, as believers, repent, confess our sins He is able to forgive us those sins. To remain in Christ one must continually confess our sins. Sins are not forgiven unless confessed.

The atoning work of Christ is finished, complete, and universal. It is now up to man to respond to God as the Holy Spirit is calling all men to repentance. The consequence of our answer is either eternal life or eternal death.

In the op where limited atonement was given as an option is scripturally impossible.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

Christ's atoning sacrifice—the sin offering slain for the sins of the world—was completed, finished, ended at the cross.

The problem, as Leviticus 16 show us, is that the popular idea of limiting the atonement doctrine to just the atoning sacrifice is a failed idea and does not survive the Bible details in Leviticus 16, where we see Christ's work as high priest continues beyond his work as the sin offering (atoning sacrifice).

Things are getting increasingly messy as we dig further into the inconsistencies cropping up in your view. Let me try and clean up the mess a little bit by asking some clarifying questions.

1. You said the process of atonement is “not completed for anyone who rejects it.” Is the process of atonement completed for those who accept it?

2. You said that (a) Christ’s atoning sacrifice was completed, finished at the cross, and that (b) the process of atonement is not completed for those who reject it. If Christ atoned for the sins of those who reject him, reconciling them and God, then how is it not completed? Is it because some for whom Christ died do not have an intercessor and mediator in heaven? (On the other hand, if Christ didn’t atone for the sins of those who reject him, reconciling them and God, then that is just the doctrine of limited atonement.)

3. Is it your understanding that the limited atonement doctrine does not include Christ’s work as high priest? (If so, then you gravely misunderstand the doctrine.)

 

[Clare73]

After reading through this thread, though it is still short, there has been no mention of the Incarnation of Christ. It may have been assumed but a understanding of the Incarnation is pertinent here as it will answer the questions raised.
Christ assumed our human nature in every respect that we are human, but because He was Incarnate His nature was not subject to corruption and death. (He gave up His life on the Cross) Man was created from the elements of this earth thus man is an consubstantial with the earth. Thus when Adam sinned the consequence of that sin was corruption and death to man and the world.
When Christ assumed our nature, was slain, but was raised from death we all will be raised from death.
Christ accomplished two things by His death and resurrection. Most importantly, he restored mankind to an eternal existence again. He reconciled the word to God. Col 1:20. II Cor 5:18-19, Heb 2:14-16, Heb 2:9 and several others.

Secondly, He provided atonement for sin. He was the sacrifice for sin. One drop of blood is sufficient for the whole world, all sins . Some, it seems, think that Christ forgave sins from the Cross, He did not. Some also think that individuals were saved from the Cross. Christ's work was universal (salvation) from death and sin for the world/mankind, reconciling the world to God.

Regarding death, immortality will be imposed upon us since we are all bear the human nature which was raised from death, He defeated death. You have tests such as I Cor 15:12-22, I Cor 15:53. and others that state all the dead will be raised.
Sacrifice for sin. No longer will man need to kill animals for their blood, Christ was the one time sacrifice for sin.
Now the world has been returned to a state where man is now in the same position as Adam was before the fall. The only difference we bear mortal natures which he did not have.

We sin because we are mortal - I Cor 15:56. We now will be able to choose life or death, same as He.

The angels are immortal, so why did they sin?

Adam was immortal in both spirit and body before he sinned, so why did he sin (which caused both his spiritual death and physical death)?

We do not sin because we are mortal, we are mortal because we (in Adam) sinned.

1 Co 15:46 - Sin = sting of death.
Angels' sin caused the loss of eternal (God's divine) life and judgment to eternal death in the rebellious angels.
Adam's sin caused the loss of eternal (God's divine) life in the human immortal spirit, loss of immortality in the human body, and will be judged to eternal death.

Christ is now our High Priest in the Heavens. When we, as believers, repent, confess our sins He is able to forgive us those sins. To remain in Christ one must continually confess our sins. Sins are not forgiven unless confessed.

The atoning work of Christ is finished, complete, and universal. It is now up to man to respond to God as the Holy Spirit is calling all men to repentance. The consequence of our answer is either eternal life or eternal death.

In the op where limited atonement was given as an option is scripturally impossible.

 

[Cassian]

The angels are immortal, so why did they sin?

They did. Satan and a host of angels rebelled. God made them immortal apparently after that. We just don't know.

Adam was immortal in both spirit and body before he sinned, so why did he sin (which caused both his spiritual death and physical death)?

Incorrect. Adam was created eternal but not immortal. If immortal He would have been incapable of sinning. Adam's nature was neutral. He could attain immortality if he remained faithful. He had the ability to become mortal as well. He chose to sin/disobey thereby corruption and death ensued.

We do not sin because we are mortal, we are mortal because we (in Adam) sinned.

1 Co 15:46 - Sin = sting of death.
Angels' sin caused the loss of eternal (God's divine) life and judgment to eternal death in the rebellious angels.
Adam's sin caused the loss of eternal (God's divine) life in the human immortal spirit, loss of immortality in the human body, and will be judged to eternal death.

We don't sin in the likeness of Adam (neutral nature) Adam died physically. Union or relationship was always possible. We have righteous men like Abel, Noah and Abraham. It was not until the Mosaic law was given that we have sacrifices for sin. If not for Christ there would be no eternal existence at all. That was the problem, the world and man would simply be dissolved by death. However, we know that God promised a deliverer in Gen 3:15 and all through the OT we have the soul/spirit returning to "God upon physical death. Scripture also states that we must die once. The purpose is to rid ourselves of our mortal body. All men will be raised, incorruptible and immortal.

Your phrase above is unscriptural because no place is another's sin ever imputed to any other individual. Our sin is totally OUR sin. If not for Christ, we could still blame Adam for his sinning because it made us by birth corrupt and mortal. God thought it was unjust that one sin brought corruption and death to all men but then His solution was an Incarnate Christ who bore our nature and raised all men to life.

 

[rturner76]

The Catholic Church understands that Christ's atonement on the Cross is sufficient for all and that it is up to the individuals to accept or reject salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

that's right brother. Hallelujah!

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:
Christ's atoning sacrifice—the sin offering slain for the sins of the world—was completed, finished, ended at the cross.

The problem, as Leviticus 16 show us, is that the popular idea of limiting the atonement doctrine to just the atoning sacrifice is a failed idea and does not survive the Bible details in Leviticus 16, where we see Christ's work as high priest continues beyond his work as the sin offering (atoning sacrifice).

15 “Then he shall slaughter the goat of the sin offering, which is for the people, and bring its blood inside the veil and do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bull, and sprinkle it on the atoning cover and in front of the atoning cover.​

I don't see how this part is even a little bit confusing for anyone.

1. You said the process of atonement is “not completed for anyone who rejects it.” Is the process of atonement completed for those who accept it?

The 1 John 2:2 "Atoning Sacrifice" is complete for all humanity on the cross and it does not matter if they accept it or not. The sin offering was slain.

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.

An "unlimited" atoning sacrifice - if you will (as another way to say it). Completed once for all at the cross

After Christ's ascension to heaven He began His work as our mediator and High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary. At some point during that ministry the antitypical "Day of Atonement" Lev 16 phase of Christ's ministry began in the Most Holy place - and it is in that work that individuals have "sins blotted out" -- case by case. Some are shown to be lost and others saved in that process that runs according to Christ's rule in Matt 7 and Paul's explanation of it in Romans 2.

2. You said that (a) Christ’s atoning sacrifice was completed, finished at the cross, and that (b) the process of atonement is not completed for those who reject it. If Christ atoned for the sins of those who reject him, reconciling them and God, then how is it not completed?

Because "Atoned for" is a bigger concept than "atoning sacrifice completed for". Someone who has received full atonement for sins in all of it's Bible scope in meaning - is not lost.

No one in the lake of fire has completed atonement for sin since they are actually burning for each and every sin - judged for each and every sin. They do not have atonement for any of their sins applied to their record in heaven.

Even so - they have the sin offering that was made for them - for which they receive no benefit since they reject it. So then none of their sins blotted out.

Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.

Is it because some for whom Christ died do not have an intercessor and mediator in heaven?

Everyone has that mediator - but some refuse it until at last they pass the boundary from which there is no return.

(On the other hand, if Christ didn’t atone for the sins of those who reject him, reconciling them and God, then that is just the doctrine of limited atonement.)

Limited atonement claims that Christ did not die to pay the actual debt of sin of some people whom he arbitrarily chose not to pay for. That teaching is not found in John 3:16 or in 1 John 2:2 or 2 Peter 3:9 "not willing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance"

3. Is it your understanding that the limited atonement doctrine does not include Christ’s work as high priest?

My understanding is that what people call "Atonement completed at the cross" only deals with the cross and Christ's work in paying the sin debt owed. "Some say" on the cross He atoned for all sins of all mankind and "some say" it is for all sins of only a few members of mankind.

On the cross He was the "sin offering" -- "Atoning Sacrifice" for all sins of all mankind (so then unlimited) - but the only members of mankind that benefit from it are those who accept Christ atoning work as High Priest (in this sense it becomes limited) -- which is also specified in Lev 16. Those who reject Christ cannot benefit from His ministry in heaven even though Christ suffered the full penalty for their sins on the cross.

 

[Clare73]

They did. Satan and a host of angels rebelled. God made them immortal apparently after that. We just don't know.

There are only two options:
mortality - dies, does not live forever,
immortality - never dies, lives forever.

So the angels who did not sin were made mortal and died,
while the angels who did sin were made immortal and do not die?
By being sinful, they got to live forever, while the sinless had to die?

FYI: The Bible presents all spirits as immortal, including the spirit of man (2 Co 5:1-9), where
the immortal human spirit is unclothed and made naked by the death of its body, its tent,
and is clothed again at the resurrection of its glorified body, its heavenly dwelling.

Incorrect. Adam was created eternal but not immortal.

What is the clear difference between "eternal" and "immortal?"

If immortal He would have been incapable of sinning. Adam's nature was neutral. He could attain immortality if he remained faithful. He had the ability to become mortal as well.
He chose to sin/disobey thereby corruption and death ensued.

Nowhere in Scripture is immortality presented as incapable of sinning.

You are mistaking the immortality of our human spiritual (incorruptible, sinless, powerful) physical body at the resurrection
(as distinct from the mortality of our natural (corruptible, sinful, weak) physical body at birth)
to mean sinlessness of all immortal beings, which to you means the angelic spirits, therefore, could not have been created immortal.

We don't sin in the likeness of Adam (neutral nature) Adam died physically. Union or relationship was always possible. We have righteous men like Abel, Noah and Abraham.

Abraham's righteousness was imputed/credited to him by God because of faith Ge 15:6, Ro 3:4), not because of his works.

It was not until the Mosaic law was given that we have sacrifices for sin. If not for Christ there would be no eternal existence at all. That was the problem, the world and man would simply be dissolved by death.

Contraire. . .there would be everlasting punishment for all (Mt 26:46), for all are condemned by the sin of Adam (Ro 5:18).

However, we know that God promised a deliverer in Gen 3:15 and all through the OT we have the soul/spirit returning to "God upon physical death. Scripture also states that we must die once. The purpose is to rid ourselves of our mortal body. All men will be raised, incorruptible and immortal.

Incorruptible (non-decaying) is immortal.

Your phrase above is unscriptural because no place is another's sin ever imputed to any other individual.

The wages of sin is death. Where there is no law with the death penalty attached as in the garden, there is no sin and, therefore, no death.
There was no law between Adam and Moses, therefore, no sin. . .yet all died. (Ro 5:12-15)
Of what sin did they die?
They died because of the sin of Adam imputed to them.

That imputation of Adam's sin to all those born of Adam (Ro 5:19) is the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputation of Christ's righteousness (Ro 4:1-11) to all those born of Christ (Ro 5:19), just as God imputed righteousness to Abraham (Ro 4:3).

Our sin is totally OUR sin. If not for Christ, we could still blame Adam for his sinning because it made us by birth corrupt and mortal. God thought it was unjust that one sin brought corruption and death to all men

God is the one who in justice punished Adam in his person, making it so.

but then His solution was an Incarnate Christ who bore our nature and raised all men to life.

Christ bore our sin, and became our nature.

Your doctrine is contra-Biblical. . .an invention of man.

 

[Cassian]

There are only two options:
mortality - dies, does not live forever,
immortality - never dies, lives forever.

No, there are two options from which Adam could choose. He was not created in either one.

So the angels who did not sin were made mortal and died,
while the angels who did sin were made immortal and do not die?
By being sinful, they got to live forever, while the sinless had to die?

Wow, where do you get that? Is that what you find in scripture?

FYI: The Bible presents all spirits as immortal, including the spirit of man (2 Co 5:1-9), where
the immortal human spirit is unclothed and made naked by the death of its body, its tent,
and is clothed again at the resurrection of its glorified body, its heavenly dwelling.

The Bible does not directly say that the soul/spirit is immortal now. The soul was created along with our bodies in the beginning. All through scripture, they were considered eternal. In the OT everyone who died went to Hades. Which is why Christ descended into Hades to free the captives there. That all souls are now immortal is not stated in scripture. It could be assumed, it really does not change anything.

What is the clear difference between "eternal" and "immortal?" Adam, man was created to be eternal. By the commandment he could either attain immortality or mortality.

Nowhere in Scripture is immortality presented as incapable of sinning.

Obviously then you believe that man will have the ability to sin in heaven while he is immortal?

You are mistaking the immortality of our human spiritual (incorruptible, sinless, powerful) physical body at the resurrection
(as distinct from the mortality of our natural (corruptible, sinful, weak) physical body at birth)
to mean sinlessness of all immortal beings, which to you means the angelic spirits, therefore, could not have been created immortal.

No mistaking at all. We don't know much about the creation, existence of Angels. We do know that they would not have been created immortal if Satan, an angel, could choose to rebel against God. When Angels became immortal is not stated it scripture. We do know that Satan dwelled on this earth because he appeared to Eve. which means he was already fallen.

Abraham's righteousness was imputed/credited to him by God because of faith Ge 15:6, Ro 3:4), not because of his works.

Yes.

Contraire. . .there would be everlasting punishment for all (Mt 26:46), for all are condemned by the sin of Adam (Ro 5:18).

If not for Christ reconciling the world back to God, there would be no punishment. Death is dust to dust. non existence. Our souls are also created and would not exist either. Everything would simply eternally end in death.
Rom 5:18 recognizes that Christ came as promised to Adam in Gen 3:15 and thus man would not die permanently but would be raised in the last day.

Incorruptible (non-decaying) is immortal.

It is saying the opposite of what happened because of Adam's sin. The consequence of his sin was corruptibility which leads to death. Our resurrection ends this corruptibility and we are given immortality. I Cor 15:53

The wages of sin is death. Where there is no law with the death penalty attached as in the garden, there is no sin and, therefore, no death.
There was no law between Adam and Moses, therefore, no sin. . .yet all died. (Ro 5:12-15)

Yes, all died because the consequence of Adam's sin was corruption and death(mortality). Which is why we know that sin was not imputed to man which is the erroneous concept of Original Sin Which both Roman Catholics and most if not all Protestants believe because of Anselm's Satisfaction Theory of atonement.
The RC recognized their error and developed a theory to try to overcome their error with the idea of the Immaculate Conception of Mary.

Of what sin did they die?
They died because of the sin of Adam imputed to them.

Incorrect. They died because they were born mortal. Adam is solely responsible for his sin. However, we bear the consequences of that sin, corruptness and mortality.

That imputation of Adam's sin to all those born of Adam (Ro 5:19) is the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputation of Christ's righteousness (Ro 4:1-11) to all those born of Christ (Ro 5:19), just as God imputed righteousness to Abraham (Ro 4:3).

Wow. this will take some unraveling. You have conflated so much I can only explain these texts as understood outside of the error of Original Sin Theory. Man was not imputed sin. Rom 5:19 is addressing the same concept of the prior verse. We sin because we are mortal not because we were imputed sin. Christ by His Incarnation, being human, taking on our human nature, bestowed upon man life - immortality. That life mentioned in vs 18 is physical immortal life which we will get at the resurrection. Has nothing to do with individuals/Abraham.
What was justified is death, to life. Another way of saying it is: Death was made right by life. I Cor 15:20-22.

God is the one who in justice punished Adam in his person, making it so.

God made the commandment and Adam disobeyed/sinned and the consequence was corruptibility and death as God had told Adam would happen.

Christ bore our sin, and became our nature.

Your doctrine is contra-Biblical. . .an invention of man.

He did both - He assumed our human nature, Incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man. (Nicene Creed)
He also took upon Himself our sin
You have not shown what I stated in unbiblical so far. It may not agree with your personal interpretation but has been the teaching of Christianity for 2000 years unchanged. The Church dealt with several heretical teachings dealing with theories developed by many men. One was on Christ's Human Nature, another His two wills, Divine and human; as well as Original Sin, the Satisfaction theory of atonement, and Limited atonement.

 

[BobRyan]

He provided atonement for sin. He was the sacrifice for sin. ...
The atoning work of Christ is finished, complete

only if you downsize the Bible definition of atonement - to "just the atoning sacrifice" rather than the entire atonement work of Christ both as High Priest and as the sin offering, lamb of God.

 

[BobRyan]

FYI: The Bible presents all spirits as immortal, including the spirit of man (2 Co 5:1-9),

2 Cor 5 does not say "all spirits of man are immortal" and there is not one "immortal soul" text in the Bible though it is a phrase we often use.

Matt 10:28 is the closest that we have for this

28 "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul - rather fear Him who is able to DESTROY BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell"

No only "kill" but also "destroy" in the case of what God does to the wicked in fiery hell. It is a contrast in magnitude. In the first case they "cannot kill" the soul and in the second case God not only kills but "destroys".

 

[Clare73]

No, there are two options from which Adam could choose. He was not created in either one.

Where do we find this in Scripture?
If we do not, it is misinformation, an invention of man.

Wow, where do you get that? Is that what you find in scripture?

That is precisely the meaning of what you stated.
Your not seeing that partly explains all the misinformation

The Bible does not directly say that the soul/spirit is immortal now. The soul was created along with our bodies in the beginning. All through scripture, they were considered eternal. In the OT everyone who died went to Hades.

More misinformation. . .

No, they went to Sheol, which was composed of both Abraham's bosom (side) and Hades.
Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom (side), the rich man was in Hades (Lk 16:19-31).

Which is why Christ descended into Hades to free the captives there.

1 Pe 3:19 states he went to preach (Gr: kerusso, "announce;" not evangelizo, "preach gospel") his victory to the disobedient spirits during the time of Noah.
Jesus said the Spirit of the Lord sent him "to proclaim freedom for the prisoners (of sin) and recovery of (spiritual) sight for the blind." (Lk 4:18)
There is nothing in the NT about setting captives free.

That all souls are now immortal is not stated in scripture. It could be assumed, it really does not change anything.

Agreed, but the reference to the difficulty of dividing soul from spirit (Heb 4:12), the NT indicating their close connection and similarity of operation, are good grounds for the immortality of the soul along with the immortality of the spirit.

Obviously then you believe that man will have the ability to sin in heaven while he is immortal?

That would be your contra-Biblical notion of "immortal."

No mistaking at all. We don't know much about the creation, existence of Angels. We do know that they would not have been created immortal if Satan, an angel, could choose to rebel against God. When Angels became immortal is not stated it scripture. We do know that Satan dwelled on this earth because he appeared to Eve. which means he was already fallen.

All based on your contra-Biblical notion of "immortal."

Yes.
If not for Christ reconciling the world back to God, there would be no punishment. Death is dust to dust. non existence.

That refers only to the material body.

Our souls are also created and would not exist either. Everything would simply eternally end in death.

Nothing of spirit nature ends in death, including the created human spirit (1 Co 5:1-9).
All spirit nature (God, angels/demons, human spirits) is immortal.
If our souls are not spiritual, they can die.

Rom 5:18 recognizes that Christ came as promised to Adam in Gen 3:15 and thus man would not die permanently but would be raised in the last day.
It is saying the opposite of what happened because of Adam's sin. The consequence of his sin was corruptibility which leads to death. Our resurrection ends this corruptibility and we are given immortality. I Cor 15:53

Agreed. . .our bodies are corruptible (mortal) and are made immortal at the resurrection.
While our spirit is immortal and does not die (1Co 5:1-9).

Yes, all died because the consequence of Adam's sin was corruption and death(mortality). Which is why we know that sin was not imputed to man

Previously addressed. . .

Feel free to exegete Rom 5:12-15, being true to its context, words and consistent with the facts presented.

which is the erroneous concept of Original Sin Which both Roman Catholics and most if not all Protestants believe because of Anselm's Satisfaction Theory of atonement.The RC recognized their error and developed a theory to try to overcome their error with the idea of the Immaculate Conception of Mary.

Agreed. . .the immaculate conception of Mary is a theory.

Incorrect. They died because they were born mortal. Adam is solely responsible for his sin. However, we bear the consequences of that sin, corruptness and mortality.

Previously explained. . .once again:

We bear the consequences of Adam's sin because we are guilty of Adam's sin.
We are born condemned (Ro 5:18), and by nature (with which we are born) objects of wrath (Eph 2:3), because of our guilt of Adam's sin.
How does God hold us guilty of, how do we inherit the consequences of, Adam's sin when the son does not inherit the guilt of the father (Ez 18:19)?
Ro 5:12-15 answers that question. . .Adam's sin is imputed to us, not inherited by us.
Paul demonstrates that it was the imputation of Adam's sin to all those between Adam and Moses which caused their deaths, when there was no law carrying the death penalty for them to sin against and, therefore, no sin that could cause their deaths (Ro 6:23).

Wow. this will take some unraveling. You have conflated so much I can only explain these texts as understood outside of the error of Original Sin Theory. Man was not imputed sin. Rom 5:19 is addressing the same concept of the prior verse. We sin because we are mortal not because we were imputed sin.

Your "unraveling" is just more raveling.

To wit: mortality does not cause sin, mortality is the result of sin (Ge 2:17).

Christ by His Incarnation, being human, taking on our human nature, bestowed upon man life - immortality. That life mentioned in vs 18 is physical immortal life which we will get at the resurrection. Has nothing to do with individuals/Abraham.

More "unraveling" which is just raveling.

To wit: righteousness from God (Ro 1:17) was imputed to Abraham (Ge 15:6, Ro 4:3), as righteousness is imputed to the born again (Ro 4:1-11).
Ro 5:18-19 parallels the imputations of righteousness and sin:
JUST AS sin is imputed to all those born of (the first) Adam (i.e., Ro 5:12-15),
SO ALSO righteousness is imputed to all those born of (the second Adam) Christ (Ro 4:1-11).

What was justified is death, to life.

More "unraveling" which is just raveling.

"Justified/justification" (Gr: dikaiosis) is a sentence of acquittal of guilt, a declaration of rightwise (righteous) standing with God's justice.
It is forensic righteousness.

Another way of saying it is: Death was made right by life. I Cor 15:20-22.

More "unraveling" which is just raveling.

1 Co 15:20-22 is saying what Ro 5:12-18 is saying; i.e., as death came through a man, so the resurrection from death comes through a man.

God made the commandment and Adam disobeyed/sinned and the consequence was corruptibility and death as God had told Adam would happen.

He did both - He assumed our human nature, Incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man. (Nicene Creed)
He also took upon Himself our sin
You have not shown what I stated in unbiblical so far.

Au contraire. . .

What has been shown so far is your inability to demonstrate any Biblical error in the multiple Scriptural demonstrations presented.

It may not agree with your personal interpretation

My "interpretations" are supported with Biblical demonstration, of which you have yet to show any Biblical error.

but has been the teaching of Christianity for 2000 years unchanged.

Not quite. . .for starters, check out the history of the meaning of "justification," which went from it being the over-all purpose of God, to salvation being the over-all purpose of God, but still not understanding that it is forensic.
It is sanctification by obedience in the Holy Spirit, which leads to righteousness leading to holiness (Ro 6:16, Ro 6:19), that is the imparted righteousness.

The Church dealt with several heretical teachings dealing with theories developed by many men. One was on Christ's Human Nature, another His two wills, Divine and human; as well as Original Sin, the Satisfaction theory of atonement, and Limited atonement.

 

[Cassian]

only if you downsize the Bible definition of atonement - to "just the atoning sacrifice" rather than the entire atonement work of Christ both as High Priest and as the sin offering, lamb of God.

It is a different atonement. You can call it a continuation of His Cross work but that atonement was to God, not man. Now that He has become our High Priest He makes man right with God through the forgiveness of sin. The first is Christ to God for mankind. The second is Christ for individual man to God.

 

[BobRyan]

It is a different atonement. You can call it a continuation of His Cross work

I don't call it "continuation of His cross work".

My claiming is that the atoning sacrifice was made full and complete - once for all.

1 John 2:2 says it is for mankind - not just a few but rather for the whole world - all of it

 

[Clare73]

2 Cor 5 does not say "all spirits of man are immortal" and there is not one "immortal soul" text in the Bible though it is a phrase we often use.

So some spirits are not immortal; i.e., they die?
What will animate their bodies at the resurrection (Mt 25:31-33, 41, 46)?

Were our spirits created mortal or immortal?
We see in 1 Co 5:1-9 that Paul's spirit is immortal.
Does that mean some are created immortal and some are not?
What would determine such a distinction in spirits at creation?
Or do human spirits change back and forth between immortal and mortal?

Matt 10:28 is the closest that we have for this

28 "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul - rather fear Him who is able to DESTROY BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell

The soul is not the spirit (Heb 4:12).

No only "kill" but also "destroy" in the case of what God does to the wicked in fiery hell. It is a contrast in magnitude. In the first case they "cannot kill" the soul and in the second case God not only kills but "destroys".

 

[Cassian]

Where do we find this in Scripture?
If we do not, it is misinformation, an invention of man.

Definitions. If Adam was created mortal, the God is the cause of sin and death in this world. Man has no culpability. If Adam was created immortal he would be unable to sin. Which will be our state in either heaven and hell.

That is precisley the meaning of what you stated.
Your not seeing that partly explains all the misinformation

More misinformation. . .

Your misunderstanding.

No, they went to Sheol, which was composed of both Abraham's bosom (side) and Hades.
Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom (side), the rich man was in Hades (Lk 16:19-31).

1 Pe 3:19 states he went to preach (Gr: kerusso, "announce;" not evangelizo, "preach gospel") his victory to the disobedient spirits during the time of Noah.
Jesus said the Spirit of the Lord sent him "to proclaim freedom for the prisoners (of sin) and recovery of (spiritual) sight for the blind." (Lk 4:18)
There is nothing in the NT about setting captives free.

Eph 3:8.

Agreed, but the reference to the difficulty of dividing soul from spirit (Heb 4:12), the NT indicating their close connection and similarity of operation, are good grounds for the immortality of the soul along the immortality of the spirit.

That would be your contra-Biblical notion of "immortal."

All based on your contra-Biblical notion of "immortal."

That refers only to the material body.

Nothing of spirit nature ends in death, including the human spirit (1 Co 5:1-9).
All spirit nature (God, angels/demons, human spirits) is immortal.
If our souls are not spiritual, they can die.

Lack of understanding the theology of scripture. Man is a created being, both body and soul are created making up man. Both can die, but God knowing that He would send a redeemer speaks of the souls of men going to Hades. Our souls have been treated as immortal because they did not die before the Resurrection. But man at the Resurrection, as a human being will be made incorruptible and immortal.
Again, if not for Christ, and God's foreknowledge both body and soul would have dissolved by death.

Yes, our bodies are corruptible (mortal) and are made immortal at the resurrection.
While our spirit is immortal and does not die (1Co 5:1-9).

See above

Previously addressed. . .

Feel free to exegete Rom 5:12-15, being true to its context, words and consistent with the facts presented.

Previously explained. . .once again:

We do not sin because we are mortal, rather we are mortal because we sin.

We bear the consequences of Adam's sin because we are guilty of Adam's sin.
How does God hold us guilty of, how do we inherit the consequences of Adam's sin when
the son does not inherit the guilt of the father (Ez 18:19)?
Ro 5:12-15 answers that question. . .Adam's sin is imputed to us, not inherited by us.
We are born condemned (Ro 5:18), by nature (with which we are born) objects of wrath (Eph 2:3) because of our guilt of Adam's sin imputed to us.

Your exegesis is fully based on the erroneous Satisfaction Theory of Anslem who included the false theory of Original Sin of Augustine. There is nothing scriptural about your statement. You have a huge theological problem when it comes to the birth of Christ. If Mary bore the sin and guilt of Adam, then so did Jesus having assumed our human natures. You need to study much more outside of the false theories that found a place in most western theology.

Your "unraveling" is just more raveling.

To wit: mortality does not cause sin, mortality is the result of sin (Ge 2:17).

Yes, for Adam, but mankind ever since Adam does not sin after the likeness of Adam. We sin because we are born mortal. suseptable to sin a lot.

More "unraveling" which is just raveling.

To wit: Righteousness from God (Ro 1:17) was imputed to Abraham (Ge 15:6, Ro 4:3), as righteousness is imputed to the born again (Ro 4:1-11).

You use this text before and you will need to show why this is important in your understanding. On the topic being discussed it is irrelevent since we are discussing the Incarnation of Christ, Christ overcome the corruption and death of mankind. It is not referencing believers at all.

Ro 5:18-19 parallels the imputations of righteousness and sin:
JUST AS sin is imputed to all those born of (the first) Adam (i.e., Ro 5:12-15),
SO ALSO righteousness is imputed to all those born of (the second Adam) Christ (Ro 4:1-11).

More of your erroneous understanding of the fall, and correction of the fall. The "imputation" in Rom 5:18-19 is life from death for mankind, (all men). Sin is NEVER imputed to anyone. Sin cannot be imputed because it is an act of man. How would you theologically develop this concept?
This idea would make man sin by definition. We are not sin. We are mortal human beings who sin. It also would be impossible to forgive "sins" if we are actually sin by difinition.
Again you need to do some study of the theology of scripture, otherwise you will constantly be falling for these man-made theories that have all been condemned by the Church.

More "unraveling" which is just raveling.

Justified/justification (Gr: dikaiosis) is a sentence of acquittal of guilt, a declaration of rightwise (righteous) standing with God's justice.
It is forensic righteousness.

More "unraveling" which is just raveling.

1 Co 15:20-22 is saying what Ro 5:12-18 is saying; i.e., as death came through a man, so the resurrection from death comes through a man.

You got this part correct. amazing

Au contraire. . .

Your inability to demonstrate any Biblical error in the multiple Scriptural demonstrations presented is what has been shown so far.

My "interpretations" are supported with Biblical demonstration, of which you have yet to show any Biblical error.

My saying so wouldn't change your mind anyway. I have never seen a sola scripturist admit he/she was incorrect in his personal interpretations even after pointing out the historical errors. You can check them yourself under Orthodox theology. Much to much to put into a post on any thread. Which is why I simply give the historical understanding of scripture as it has always been understood from the beginning. Not based on some guy's erroneous interpretation.
So far you have not shown you have the scriptural understanding, but only that of some erroneous theories.

Not quite. . .for starters, check out the history of the meaning of "justification," which went from it being the primary purpose of God to salvation being the primary purpose of God.

The history goes back much further that your understanding of the Satisfaction theory of Anselm in the 11th century.

 

[Clare73]

Definitions. If Adam was created mortal, the God is the cause of sin and death in this world.

You do not understand the meaning of "mortal" and "immortal." They do not mean "sinful" and "sinless," respectively.
Mortal = subject to death
Immortal = not subject to death, imperishable

The punishment for Adam's sin was loss of immortality, subjection to mortality.
Mortality is the result of sin, it is not the cause of sin.
Sin is the cause of mortality, sin is not the result of mortality.

This major misunderstanding permeates all your soteriology, causing all your misunderstanding of it,
which misunderstanding I have gone to great lengths to unravel,
but your misunderstanding of NT soteriology cannot be resolved until you have a correct understanding of "mortal/immortal."

So that makes this discussion useless, and the following is the last I will be addressing:

You use this text before and you will need to show why this is important in your understanding. On the topic being discussed it is irrelevent since we are discussing the Incarnation of Christ, Christ overcome the corruption and death of mankind. It is not referencing believers at all.

My comment was:

"To wit: righteousness from God (Ro 1:17) was imputed to Abraham (Ge 15:6, Ro 4:3), as
righteousness is imputed to the born again (Ro 4:1-11).

Ro 5:18-19 parallels the imputations of righteousness and of sin; i.e.,
JUST AS sin is imputed to all those born of (the first) Adam (i.e., Ro 5:12-15),
SO ALSO righteousness is imputed to all those born of (the second Adam) Christ (Ro 4:1-11)"

and which was in response to your reference to v.18 (Ro 5:18), which verse demonstrates the imputation of Adam's sin to all those born of Adam (which you deny). . .in a parallel to the imputation of Christ's righteousness to all those born of Christ.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

I don't see how this part is even a little bit confusing for anyone.

The fact that Jesus has an ongoing function as our high priest in heaven is not confusing at all. It is something that we ourselves believe quite strongly in the Reformed camp. (See, for example, “The Intercession of Christ” by Francis Turretin). What is confusing to me are your ideas of what his high priestly function involves and what his life, death, and resurrection accomplished. Adventist soteriology is anything but typical, so it can become confusing rather quickly to outsiders.

[The atoning sacrifice of 1 John 2:2 was] complete for all humanity on the cross and it does not matter if they accept it or not. ... [And it was] an “unlimited” atoning sacrifice ...

First, you originally said, “The process of atonement is not completed for anyone who rejects it.” So, I asked you a follow-up question: Is the process of atonement completed for those who accept it? You did not answer that question here, so it still needs an answer.

Second, you believe that Christ’s atoning sacrifice was a finished work, and that it included (among other things) bearing and satisfying God’s just wrath against our sins (English, propitiation; Greek, hilasmos). That raises two crucial questions:

Question 1: Did Jesus die for all the sins of all humanity, or most of the sins of all humanity?

Question 2: Are those who reject Christ punished for their sins after judgment?

After Christ's ascension to heaven, he began his work as our mediator and high priest in the heavenly sanctuary. At some point during that ministry, the antitypical Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16) phase of Christ's ministry began in the Most Holy place—and it is in that work that individuals have "sins blotted out," case by case.

Question 3 (following from Question 1): Does Jesus blot out ALL the sins for which he died?

Question 4: Is the work that Jesus does as our high priest in heaven a matter of grace or merit?

No one in the lake of fire has completed atonement for sin since they are actually burning for each and every sin—judged for each and every sin. They do not have atonement for any of their sins applied to their record in heaven.

You did not answer my question, so let me expand on it here. If Christ’s atoning sacrifice was a finished work and it included, among other things, bearing and satisfying God’s just wrath against our sins (for that’s what 1 John 2:2 says), then why would anybody be sentenced to burn in the lake of fire? Did Christ bear the punishment which their sins were due? Did he satisfy God’s just wrath against sin? If not, then he was not the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.

If Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world—if he satisfied God’s wrath against the sins for which he died—then what is the lake of fire? Not God’s wrath against those sins.

Even so, they have the sin offering that was made for them for which they receive no benefit since they reject it. So then none of their sins blotted out.

You said that Christ, as our high priest in the heavenly sanctuary, was blotting out the sins of humanity one case at a time. And here you said there are some sins which aren’t blotted out. Why would Christ not blot out those particular sins? You said it’s because they rejected the sin offering. That tells me what the answer Question 4 would be, then: “The work that Jesus does as our high priest in heaven is a matter of merit” (i.e., Christ will only blot out the sins of those who [insert whatever it is here]).

In Acts 3:19 we hear Peter declaring that people should repent and flee to God, that their sins may be wiped out. And this the Calvinist strongly affirms: Jesus died for and blots out the sins of only believers—so be one of them. Jesus didn’t die for and will not blot out the sins of unbelievers, which is why God is just in condemning them to hell.

Everyone has that mediator - but some refuse it until at last they pass the boundary from which there is no return.

I asked you, “Is it because some [of those] for whom Christ died do not have an intercessor and mediator in heaven?” Your answer here stands in contradiction to the intercessory prayer Christ offered on behalf of believers only: “I am not praying on behalf of the world,” he said, “but on behalf of those you have given me, because they belong to you. ... [and] also on behalf of those who believe in me through their testimony” (John 17:9, 20). The intercession of our high priest in heaven is only for believers, “for those who draw near to God through him” (Heb 7:25), the church (Eph 5:25-27), the believing elect (Rom 8:33-34).

Limited atonement claims that christ did not die to pay the actual debt of sin of some people whom he arbitrarily chose not to pay for. That teaching is not found in John 3:16 or in 1 John 2:2

According to the doctrine of limited atonement, there are some for whom Christ did not die and does not intercede. The Father gave only the sheep to the Son, and that is for whom he laid down his life. To the goats he will say, “I never knew you.”

My understanding is that what people call "atonement completed at the cross" only deals with the cross and Christ's work in paying the sin debt owed.

Then, as I said, you gravely misunderstand the doctrine. Before you oppose a doctrine, you should first accurately understand it—I mean, at a bare minimum.

 

[Cassian]

You do not understand the meaning of "mortal" and "immortal." They do not mean "sinful" and "sinless," respectively.
Mortal = subject to death
Immortal = not subject to death, imperishable

The punishment for Adam's sin was loss of immortality, subjection to mortality.

Agreed, Adam had the choice of choosing either. He chose death/disobey.

Mortality is the result of sin, it is not the cause of sin.

For Adam this is absolutely true.

Sin is the cause of mortality, sin is not the result of mortality.

The first clause is the same as above for Adam. But unfortunately, we are not born neutral Palagianism, but rather mortal. It is our corrupt, mortal nature that causes us to sin. I Cor 15:56. Man does not become more mortal because he sins. We cannot become mortal more than one time. Scripture says we will die once.

This major misunderstanding permeates all your soteriology, causing all your misunderstanding of it,
which misunderstanding I have gone to great lengths to unravel,
but your misunderstanding of NT soteriology cannot be resolved until you have a correct understanding of "mortal/immortal."

You have gone to great lengths to show that your view of scripture is full of errors that have long been determined to be false.

So that makes this discussion useless, and the following is the last I will be addressing:

My comment was:

"To wit: righteousness from God (Ro 1:17) was imputed to Abraham (Ge 15:6, Ro 4:3), as
righteousness is imputed to the born again (Ro 4:1-11).

Ro 5:18-19 parallels the imputations of righteousness and of sin; i.e.,
JUST AS sin is imputed to all those born of (the first) Adam (i.e., Ro 5:12-15),
SO ALSO righteousness is imputed to all those born of (the second Adam) Christ (Ro 4:1-11)"

and which was in response to your reference to v.18 (Ro 5:18), which verse demonstrates the imputation of Adam's sin to all those born of Adam (which you deny). . .in a parallel to the imputation of Christ's righteousness to all those born of Christ.

I deny it because it is a heresy. You need to study the theories of Original Sin, and the Satisfaction theory and why they are heretical.
That is not me saying they are heretical, It is the Church that states they are heretical. Both views were incorporated as Church doctrine by the RC when they accepted Anselms theory in the 11th century. By default, though not in the discussion, your view also denies the Incarnation of Christ. I did make note of it as the RC, instead of rejecting the false theories, let them remain, but created a whole new one, the Immaculate conception of Mary. I don't recommend you do the same. But do recommend that you discard the false teachings and have a correct understanding of the fall and the correction of the fall.

 

[Hawkins]

As I said before, salvation can be modeled as a bell shape normal (or not) distribution of human/angel behavior against time measured by Law, where 2/3 angels are saved at the end. With a larger degree of free will there could be less than 1/3 humans saved (i.e., when normally or nearly normally modelled), however "all are saved" still represents a mathematically probability. God wishes all are saved still makes mathematical sense. For that matter, God's preparation for our salvation stands even in that odd case that "all humans are saved".

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

As I said before, salvation can be modeled as a bell shape normal (or not) distribution of human/angel behavior against time measured by Law, where 2/3 angels are saved at the end. With a larger degree of free will there could be less than 1/3 humans saved (i.e., when normally or nearly normally modelled), however "all are saved" still represents a mathematically probability. God wishes all are saved still makes mathematical sense. For that matter, God's preparation for our salvation stands even in that odd case that "all humans are saved".

Searching for an explanation of who, and how many, are saved among angels and human beings is interesting but I think it is impious. Moses wrote, "The secret things belong to the LORD our God; but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." - what is revealed is revealed so that we can do good as God asks. What is not revealed, the secret things, are not for us to speculate about, despite the interest we may have in them and the excitement that speculating engenders.