Limited Atonement

[theseed]

I can, the fundmental problem you have is that atonement does not mean salvation, as so many Calvinists, and apparentlly Calvin himself thought/think

Atonement just means that Christ pays for the sins, and I can rightly say that he payed for the sins of the whole world, for every person, without exception.

If Christ had not, then God could not hold the unelect responsible for rejecting Christ.

Salvation comes by grace alone through faith alone. God has done this so that we must glorify him inorder to be saved. We must profess Christ as Lord and Savior with our lips and believe with our heart--to God's glory (Rom. 10.9-13, Phil. 2)

Here is a thread I started a while ago arguing my case, with some scripture

I quote Ryrie, a Bapist theologian

http://www.christianforums.com/t103469

Anyways, his atonement is unlimited in value, but limited in application. Christ is the coupon, but some refuse to cash in, and so they will pay up later.

 

[Tinkerbell222222]

I'm a Calvinist, but I still have a lot of problems with this doctrine, Mainly because of 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." I have never had a satisfactory explaination of that verse in terms of Limited Atonement. Could anyone help?

 

[oworm]

So you are quite happy to believe then, that God has saved you by electing ?

Absolutely !!

(selecting you)

God doesnt select,its not as if he lifts a bag of humans and picks out the ones he likes......................If that were the case he may only have picked the black ones and left the rest

but He is willing and happy to send other members of your family to hell because they haven't been elected (selected).

Hell was prepared for the devil and his angels. Not humans!! HE is not 'happy' and 'willing' that any should perish. Those outside of his plan of salvation are not willing to repent and have absolutely no desire to be redeemed or to humble themselves and accept his free gift of salvation.

If you want to continue to challenge our beliefs why dont you open a debate at http://www.christianforums.com/f182 or post questions in http://www.christianforums.com/f83 This is the reformed forum for those of us who hold to reformed theology to hang out and find fellowship.
I dont mean to sound abrasive and my intention is not to be argumentative but if you dont like the theological doctrines of the reformed faith then it would be better not to visit the reformed forum if you find the doctrines offensive or unpallatable.

 

[tigersnare]

it would be better not to visit the reformed forum if you find the doctrines offensive or unpallatable.

I second the motion. I think this was a big reason these forums were formed, in part so like minds could be edified without being sidetracked on every thread.

I could be wrong though...

 

[Buttermilk]

This is the reformed forum for those of us who hold to reformed theology to hang out and find fellowship.

So where better a place to find answers to my perfectly valid questions about your theology

I dont mean to sound abrasive and my intention is not to be argumentative but if you dont like the theological doctrines of the reformed faith then it would be better not to visit the reformed forum if you find the doctrines offensive or unpallatable.

Could you please point out where I have actually said any of the above. I have carefully scanned my posts and can't find any of the above comments anywhere in them.

 

[oworm]

So where better a place to find answers to my perfectly valid questions about your theology


Could you please point out where I have actually said any of the above. I have carefully scanned my posts and can't find any of the above comments anywhere in them.

You and i both know from previous conversations what your position is. Ok you havent posted it here but dont insult my knowledge of your views since you know from indepth experience our previous discussions !!!

BTW everyone BUTTERMILK is a friend of mine

 

[Buttermilk]

I second the motion. I think this was a big reason these forums were formed, in part so like minds could be edified without being sidetracked on every thread.

I could be wrong though...

I can assure you that was never my intention.

Just for the record tigersnare I happen to be a member of the Church of Scotland - A Reformed Church, so I am quite at liberty to post in this forum.

My reason for posting is this (not that I should have to justify my reason) - I have a genuine issue with the idea of Limited Atonement, and am genuinely interested in people's answers to my questions, including your own opinion.

 

[theseed]

I'm a Calvinist, but I still have a lot of problems with this doctrine, Mainly because of 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." I have never had a satisfactory explaination of that verse in terms of Limited Atonement. Could anyone help?

They say that the "world" means only the elect. And that is a big stretch IMHO.

I find Ryries explanation to be the best. You can read it here.

http://www.christianforums.com/t103469

 

[vibrant]

ok... hopefully you don't mind a non-reformist asking a question, but when i was studying calvinism, i really didn't get the info that said that Christ's atonement only PARTIALLY atoned for sins (of the elect). can someone explain that?

 

[theseed]

ok... hopefully you don't mind a non-reformist asking a question, but when i was studying calvinism, i really didn't get the info that said that Christ's atonement only PARTIALLY atoned for sins (of the elect). can someone explain that?

That is not what Limited Atonement means--it means that Christ only atones for those people that God elected to salvation--and therefore not everbody.

However, I hold to the view that it is infinite in potential, but limited in application.

 

[tigersnare]

So God does not love the so called unelect then?

Mmm, Sorry the but the God I believe in loves everyone unconditionally , not just a small selection of people.

Ok after reading your posts again here is my input.

I would ask where you have formed the idea of the God you believe, and what you do with verses like, "Jacob I loved but Eseu I hated".

You also want to know how I feel about LA?

I thank God for it everyday, I deserve to burn in hell, the fact that there is even a redemptive plan at all should bring on glorious praises from me continually.

 

[tigersnare]

I can assure you that was never my intention. My reason for posting is this (not that I should have to justify my reason) - I have a genuine issue with the idea of Limited Atonement, and am genuinely interested in people's answers to my questions, including your own opinion.

Well the part about you saying the God you believe in wouldn't do what our theology teaches was, hmm....questionable. But like I said, I could be wrong, always open to that.

 

[BronxBriar]

The hangup for many is the misconception that Limited Atonement means that God has chosen some for election to salvation and some for eternal punishment. God does not choose anyone for punishment. We deserve punishment. No one is righteous in himself. It is only through God's grace that some are saved. We do not know why God choses some for salvation and not others. That is a mystery that is best for us not to dwell on.

I agree with:

God does NOT choose anyone for punishment
We DESERVE punishment (because we sin right?)
It is through Grace we are saved.

I know you asked not to dwell on it..but...if I understand I am a sinner, acknowledge the fact that I deserve to punished, and I truly desire to be saved, to dwell among the elect, can I rest in some certainty that I will be?
If we live without any certainty that we are among the elect that would cause a certain amount of existential angst I would imagine..well at least in me it would.

Your thoughts would be appreciated. I am new to reformed theology, so please bear with any misstatements I may have made.

Regards,
Henry

 

[Foundthelight]

I agree with:

God does NOT choose anyone for punishment
We DESERVE punishment (because we sin right?)
It is through Grace we are saved.

I know you asked not to dwell on it..but...if I understand I am a sinner, acknowledge the fact that I deserve to punished, and I truly desire to be saved, to dwell among the elect, can I rest in some certainty that I will be?
If we live without any certainty that we are among the elect that would cause a certain amount of existential angst I would imagine..well at least in me it would.

Your thoughts would be appreciated. I am new to reformed theology, so please bear with any misstatements I may have made.

Regards,
Henry

Thanks for your question Henry.

A true desire to be saved is a sign that the Holy Spirit is working in you. We cannot have that true desire on our own. It is a gift from God.

The Canons of Dort is one of the great documents of the Reformed Church and does address this question. The below is from the Canons which date from 1619.

Article 12 - The Assurance of Election

The elect in due time, though in various stages and in different measure, are made certain of this their eternal and unchangeable election to salvation. They attain this assurance, however, not by inquisitively prying into the hidden and deep things of God, but by observing in themselves, with spiritual joy and holy delight, the unfailing fruits of election pointed out in the Word of God - such as a true faith in Christ, a childlike fear of God, a godly sorrow for their sins, and a hungering and thirsting after righteousness.

​

​

Article 13 - The Value of This Assurance​

​

​

The awareness and assurance of this election provide the children of God with greater reason for daily humbling themselves before God, for adoring the depth of His mercies, for cleansing themselves, and for fervently loving Him in turn who first so greatly loved them. It is therefore not true at all that this doctrine of election and the reflection on it makes them lax in observing the commands of God or falsely secure. In the just judgment of God, this usually happens to those who rashly presume to have the grace of election, or idly and boldly chatter about it, but refuse to walk in the ways of the elect.

​

​

​

I love the last sentence of Article 13. How many of us have met people like this?​

The bottom line is: ​

Do you love the Lord and thirst after his word? ​

​

Do you walk in awe and fear of the Lord?​

Are you striving to walk in the way of the Lord?​

Is all this coming from the inner urging of the Holy Spirit?​

​

Ps. I am not talking about Fanaticism here. We all feel this push in different ways and at different levels of intensity. We all have periods of backsliding. But, within those periods, there is the inner push to get back on the right road.​

God Bless​

Willis.​

​

 

[BronxBriar]

Willis,

Thank you so much! I will certainly look into the Canons of Dort!

-Henry

 

[Buttermilk]

I would ask where you have formed the idea of the God you believe

Er, em, let me think now - from the Bible

 

[tigersnare]

Er, em, let me think now - from the Bible

I knew you would say this....hence why I put forth the rest of the sentence that you did not quote nor reply to.

 

[Buttermilk]

I knew you would say this....hence why I put forth the rest of the sentence that you did not quote nor reply to.

There are plenty of verses that state that God loves everyone and that Jesus died for, everyone

 

[Bulldog]

Do you believe God has a saving love for all?

 

[Buttermilk]

Do you believe God has a saving love for all?

Potentially, yes