Prevenient Grace, No Limited Atonement, 4 Pointer, Calvinist, or not?

[TheBibleIsTruth]

In the first place, your use of Mk. 14:24 is questionable at best.

In the Greek, it simply means a number beyond numbering.

Secondly, can you say without exception that the word "world" literally means the entire world? There is no evidence of it.

Have you ever studied "scope and effect"?

Evidently not.

The price for sin was paid for in full by our Lord. The "scope' was to "tone for sin".

However, the effect is that not everybody takes advantage of it.

While the scope of Christ's death was "unlimited", the effect is that it is "limited" to the "elect".

This principle goes back to the Old Testament.

"The Old Testament only knew a limited design to sacrifice and atonement, didn’t it? There was no universal purpose in the Mosaic sacrifices was there? The Egyptians who worshipped their gods, and the Babylonians similarly sacrificing to their idols, and the Assyrians, and the Canaanites, and the Medes, and the Persians prostrating themselves before figures of stone, gold and silver – none of them had their sins purged away by the Jewish sacrifices made at that altar erected outside the tabernacle and later at the temple in Jerusalem. Only Israel’s sins were pardoned on the Day of Atonement when the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies with the blood of the sacrifice. Only the names of the twelve tribes of Israel were carried upon his breastplate. You look in vain for the names of Egypt, or Babylon, or Assyria and the rest. Full atonement was limited to the repentant, obedient, sacrificing people of God wasn’t it?"

Source

Just like those who were "ordained to eternal life" in Acts 13:48, when they preached to the whole town, only a certain number believed.

The Gospel message is to be preached to all men without exception, but only some will accept and believe.

Sorry.

God Bless

Till all are one.

How about the fact that Jesus Christ dying for Judas, where you can read in Luke 22, Jesus told him that His blood was shed for "YOU", that is ALL the 12! Was Jesus being dishonest in this?

 

[DeaconDean]

How about the fact that Jesus Christ dying for Judas, where you can read in Luke 22, Jesus told him that His blood was shed for "YOU", that is ALL the 12! Was Jesus being dishonest in this?

Whatever.

I guess it is possible to be a son of perdition and born again.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Whatever.

I guess it is possible to be a son of perdition and born again.

God Bless

Till all are one.

I did not say that Judas was ever born again, but that Jesus died for him. 2 Peter 2:1 clearly says that Jesus died for heretics who will end up in hell!

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

In the first place, your use of Mk. 14:24 is questionable at best.

In the Greek, it simply means a number beyond numbering.

Secondly, can you say without exception that the word "world" literally means the entire world? There is no evidence of it.

Have you ever studied "scope and effect"?

Evidently not.

The price for sin was paid for in full by our Lord. The "scope' was to "tone for sin".

However, the effect is that not everybody takes advantage of it.

While the scope of Christ's death was "unlimited", the effect is that it is "limited" to the "elect".

This principle goes back to the Old Testament.

"The Old Testament only knew a limited design to sacrifice and atonement, didn’t it? There was no universal purpose in the Mosaic sacrifices was there? The Egyptians who worshipped their gods, and the Babylonians similarly sacrificing to their idols, and the Assyrians, and the Canaanites, and the Medes, and the Persians prostrating themselves before figures of stone, gold and silver – none of them had their sins purged away by the Jewish sacrifices made at that altar erected outside the tabernacle and later at the temple in Jerusalem. Only Israel’s sins were pardoned on the Day of Atonement when the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies with the blood of the sacrifice. Only the names of the twelve tribes of Israel were carried upon his breastplate. You look in vain for the names of Egypt, or Babylon, or Assyria and the rest. Full atonement was limited to the repentant, obedient, sacrificing people of God wasn’t it?"

Source

Just like those who were "ordained to eternal life" in Acts 13:48, when they preached to the whole town, only a certain number believed.

The Gospel message is to be preached to all men without exception, but only some will accept and believe.

Sorry.

God Bless

Till all are one.

With regards to Acts 13:48, you would do well to read this in its context, and, if you can, from the Greek text, with knowledge of Greek grammar, as it is important here. Firstly, the word "ordain" has more to do with the "theology" of the translators, than what the Greek word actually does say. The Greek word here is "τάσσω", which is mainly a military term. Its main meaning being, "draw up in order of battle, form, array, marshal, both of troops and ships, appoint to any service, military or civil". There is NO idea in the word of anything or anyone being "pre-ordained" to anything. This word simply does not mean this! In verse 46 we read that the Jews rejected the Gospel Message, and Paul says that they considered themselves unworthy of eternal life, not God. The "action" spoken of here, is known in grammar as "middle voice", something that the Jews "considered and did". When Paul took this Message to the Gentiles, they gladly accepted it, and by doing so, "aligned themselves" on God's side! It is important to note, that God never considered the Jews as not worthy of eternal life, they did. This shows that they, like all humans, have "free wills"!

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

John Calvin's name may have been put to this document, but no one can say for sure that he did it and accepted any of this? The fact that he very clearly says on John 3:16, Mark 14:24, and Colossians 1:14, that Jesus died for "the whole human race", is sufficient for any honest mind to conclude that he meant what he says here"!

So on one hand no one can say, and on the other hand you have psychic ability to read John Calvin's mind as to what he meant by "the whole human race"? On that note, I certainly believe Christ died for all races of men...of course that doesn't mean literally men alone, as if women and children were not included.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Anyone interested in an honest evaluation can read Dr. Roger Nicole, part of his article from a past issue of Westminster Theological Journal can be read here: John Calvin’s view of Limited Atonement – by Dr. Roger Nicole | A Puritan's Mind in which he concludes "Our conclusion, on balance, is that definite atonement fits better than universal grace into the total pattern of Calvin’s teaching." And I could not agree more.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

But, if John Calvin did not believe that Jesus died only for the "elect", but for the "whole human race", is it not very misleading to claim that he did, by using the term "Five Points of Calvinism", which does NOT represent John Calvin's teachings?

Considering John Calvin is probably best known for his teachings on double predestination, I find your claim to be tainted with a bias leading to misrepresentation. To say the atonement is sufficient for all, is far from saying the atonement is efficient for all, and it is certain that Calvin did not believe the atonement to be efficient for all.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

John Calvin:
" That whosoever believeth on him may not perish. It is a remarkable commendation of faith, that it frees us from everlasting destruction. For he intended expressly to state that, though we appear to have been born to death, undoubted deliverance is offered to us by the faith of Christ; and, therefore, that we ought not to fear death, which otherwise hangs over us. And he has employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such is also the import of the term World, which he formerly used; for though nothing will be found in the world that is worthy of the favor of God, yet he shows himself to be reconciled to the whole world, when he invites all men without exception to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than an entrance into life." (Commentary on John)

YES, the Gospel call is to all, YES all are invited, and this is why it is called "foolishness".

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

YES, the Gospel call is to all, YES all are invited, and this is why it is called "foolishness".

However, ALL cannot be called and invited, unless provision had been made in the Death of Jesus Christ on the cross. Otherwise the call and invitation would be insincere!

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Considering John Calvin is probably best known for his teachings on double predestination, I find your claim to be tainted with a bias leading to misrepresentation. To say the atonement is sufficient for all, is far from saying the atonement is efficient for all, and it is certain that Calvin did not believe the atonement to be efficient for all.

John Calvin on John 3:16 and others.

" That whosoever believeth on him may not perish. It is a remarkable commendation of faith, that it frees us from everlasting destruction. For he intended expressly to state that, though we appear to have been born to death, undoubted deliverance is offered to us by the faith of Christ; and, therefore, that we ought not to fear death, which otherwise hangs over us. And he has employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such is also the import of the term World, which he formerly used; for though nothing will be found in the world that is worthy of the favor of God, yet he shows himself to be reconciled to the whole world, when he invites all men without exception to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than an entrance into life." (Commentary on John)

Note the words that I have made bold. Language that no "Calvinist" would use for this verse! "all men without exception", which hardly "Calvinistic" language, which is "without distinction"! Then on Mark 14:24, " Which is shed for many. By the word many he means not a part of the world only, but the whole human race". IF, as some suppose, that this "Limited Atonement" as part of the 5 Points (T.U.L.I.P.), is from John Calvin's teachings, then he could never have written these words on Mark 14:24. Note the careful language, "not part of the world", which is exactly what Limited Atonement teaches, that only a "part", that is, "the elect", is who Christ died for. No, says Calvin, "the WHOLE human race", is included in the death of the Lord Jesus Christ! AMEN!!!. One more example from Calvin. Colossians 1:14, " He says that this redemption was procured through the blood of Christ, for by the sacrifice of his death all the sins of the world have been expiated".

 

[AMR]

See:
John Calvin’s view of Limited Atonement – by Dr. Roger Nicole | A Puritan's Mind

Q.E.D.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

However, ALL cannot be called and invited, unless provision had been made in the Death of Jesus Christ on the cross. Otherwise the call and invitation would be insincere!

Why would it be insincere? If a Pastor is preaching before a congregation, he is able to point out the elect from the non-elect? No, of course not. The call and invitation are sincere, and God knows who His elect are, before He makes their calling effectual.

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Why would it be insincere? If a Pastor is preaching before a congregation, he is able to point out the elect from the non-elect? No, of course not. The call and invitation are sincere, and God knows who His elect are, before He makes their calling effectual.

How then can God "COMMAND that ALL men everywhere repent" (Acts 17:30), if He did not mean it? The context in which this is spoken, is Paul speaking to the people at Athens, who were seeking for the One True God. ALL these to whom Paul speaks these words, that God COMMANDS they repent. No SOME, or MOST, but ALL! I have already shown from Luke 22, and the Lord's Supper, where Jesus tells Judas, and the others, that He was to shed His blood for them ALL. If Judas was not to be included in the YOU, then Jesus would have waited for Judas to have left the room, and then instituted the Lord's Supper, which He did not do! In a conversation with the Jews who wanted to murder Jesus, He tells them, "Not that the testimony that I receive is from man, but I say these things so that you may be saved" (John 5:34). YES, Jesus even wanted ALL those who opposed and wanted to kill Him, like Judas, to be saved! Only those who would twist the teaching of the Holy Bible from what it clearly says, would ever believe in any "limit" on Jesus' Atonement!

 

[DeaconDean]

With regards to Acts 13:48, you would do well to read this in its context, and, if you can, from the Greek text, with knowledge of Greek grammar, as it is important here. Firstly, the word "ordain" has more to do with the "theology" of the translators, than what the Greek word actually does say. The Greek word here is "τάσσω", which is mainly a military term. Its main meaning being, "draw up in order of battle, form, array, marshal, both of troops and ships, appoint to any service, military or civil". There is NO idea in the word of anything or anyone being "pre-ordained" to anything. This word simply does not mean this! In verse 46 we read that the Jews rejected the Gospel Message, and Paul says that they considered themselves unworthy of eternal life, not God. The "action" spoken of here, is known in grammar as "middle voice", something that the Jews "considered and did". When Paul took this Message to the Gentiles, they gladly accepted it, and by doing so, "aligned themselves" on God's side! It is important to note, that God never considered the Jews as not worthy of eternal life, they did. This shows that they, like all humans, have "free wills"!

You know, you are a funny person.

In the first place, I have taken Greek in seminary.

In the second place, I have studied the passage in context. You evidently have not.

While "tasso" certainly does have "military" implications, that is not the case in Acts 13:48.

"ἀκούοντα δὲ τὰ ἔθνη ἔχαιρον καὶ ἐδόξαζον τὸν λόγον τοῦ κυρίου, καὶ ἐπίστευσαν ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον:" -Acts 13:48 (GNT)

I draw your attention to the word "τεταγμένοι".

"τάσσω,v \{tas'-so}
1) to put in order, to station 1a) to place in a certain order, to arrange, to assign a place, to appoint 1a1) to assign (appoint) a thing to one 1b) to appoint, ordain, order 1b1) to appoint on one's own responsibility or authority 1b2) to appoint mutually, i.e. agree upon"

Source

Now I admit, it does say: "to place in a certain order, to arrange, to assign a place, to appoint", but my problem with you is you see that, and look no further.

It also says: "to appoint, ordain, order".

Perhaps you'll accuse me of using a slighted lexicon.

Very well, how about some Hellenistic documents that also show "tasso" was used in this fashion?

"2. ordain, prescribe, “τ. τὰ περὶ τὰ τέκνα” Arist.Pol.1262b6: abs., ὁ νόμος οὕτω τ. Pl.La.199a; “οὕτω τ. ὁ λόγος” Arist.EN1119b17:—Pass., “τὸ ταττόμενον” Ar.Ec.766; “τὸ ταχθὲν τελεῖν” S.Aj.528; “τὰ τεταγμένα” X.Cyr.1.2.5, etc.;"

Source

I have done my research, I have done my studying.

You on the other hand...

And it does not change one bit what I said earlier.

Out of that entire town that turned out to hear the preaching, those and only those who God "elected" or "ordained" to eternal life, believed.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

You know, you are a funny person.

In the first place, I have taken Greek in seminary.

In the second place, I have studied the passage in context. You evidently have not.

While "tasso" certainly does have "military" implications, that is not the case in Acts 13:48.

"ἀκούοντα δὲ τὰ ἔθνη ἔχαιρον καὶ ἐδόξαζον τὸν λόγον τοῦ κυρίου, καὶ ἐπίστευσαν ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον:" -Acts 13:48 (GNT)

I draw your attention to the word "τεταγμένοι".

"τάσσω,v \{tas'-so}
1) to put in order, to station 1a) to place in a certain order, to arrange, to assign a place, to appoint 1a1) to assign (appoint) a thing to one 1b) to appoint, ordain, order 1b1) to appoint on one's own responsibility or authority 1b2) to appoint mutually, i.e. agree upon"

Source

Now I admit, it does say: "to place in a certain order, to arrange, to assign a place, to appoint", but my problem with you is you see that, and look no further.

It also says: "to appoint, ordain, order".

Perhaps you'll accuse me of using a slighted lexicon.

Very well, how about some Hellenistic documents that also show "tasso" was used in this fashion?

"2. ordain, prescribe, “τ. τὰ περὶ τὰ τέκνα” Arist.Pol.1262b6: abs., ὁ νόμος οὕτω τ. Pl.La.199a; “οὕτω τ. ὁ λόγος” Arist.EN1119b17:—Pass., “τὸ ταττόμενον” Ar.Ec.766; “τὸ ταχθὲν τελεῖν” S.Aj.528; “τὰ τεταγμένα” X.Cyr.1.2.5, etc.;"

Source

I have done my research, I have done my studying.

You on the other hand...

And it does not change one bit what I said earlier.

Out of that entire town that turned out to hear the preaching, those and only those who God "elected" or "ordained" to eternal life, believed.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Glad to know that you have a knowledge in Greek, it helps. Then you must know that "τεταγμένοι" does not in this context, have to be taken as "passive", and can, as the context demands, be taken in the "middle" voice. This has nothing to do with my "theology", but the fact that in verse 46 we see the "actions" of the Jews were "self-determining", as God did not so consider them as being unworthy of eternal life, a point that Paul makes. It was the direct self-action of the Jews in their rejection of the Gospel Message, that Paul took this message to the Gentiles, who when hearing the Good News, gladly accepted it, and thereby "enrolled themselves" on God's side. Sure God's hand was there as He used Paul to take the Message of their salvation to them.

You must also know that "ordain", is not the same as "pre-ordain", and that "τεταγμένοι" does not mean this.

If our "theology" were not involved here, then any student of Greek would accept that this passage (not just one verse), does not teach God "predestining " anyone to eternal life, as much as some would like it to!

 

[DeaconDean]

Glad to know that you have a knowledge in Greek, it helps. Then you must know that "τεταγμένοι" does not in this context, have to be taken as "passive", and can, as the context demands, be taken in the "middle" voice. This has nothing to do with my "theology", but the fact that in verse 46 we see the "actions" of the Jews were "self-determining", as God did not so consider them as being unworthy of eternal life, a point that Paul makes. It was the direct self-action of the Jews in their rejection of the Gospel Message, that Paul took this message to the Gentiles, who when hearing the Good News, gladly accepted it, and thereby "enrolled themselves" on God's side. Sure God's hand was there as He used Paul to take the Message of their salvation to them.

You must also know that "ordain", is not the same as "pre-ordain", and that "τεταγμένοι" does not mean this.

If our "theology" were not involved here, then any student of Greek would accept that this passage (not just one verse), does not teach God "predestining " anyone to eternal life, as much as some would like it to!

Here again, it does not rely on mine or your "theology".

The Greek is plain as day here.

"And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." -Acts 13:48 (KJV)

Men, especially in this usage, did not appoint or ordain themselves.

Somebody "appointed"/"ordained" and it was not the "free-will" of men.

I haven't said one word about "predestination" in this thread. Your the one doing that.

Like I said, the Greek and the English does not agree with your P.O.V.

Sorry.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Here again, it does not rely on mine or your "theology".

The Greek is plain as day here.

"And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." -Acts 13:48 (KJV)

Men, especially in this usage, did not appoint or ordain themselves.

Somebody "appointed"/"ordained" and it was not the "free-will" of men.

I haven't said one word about "predestination" in this thread. Your the one doing that.

Like I said, the Greek and the English does not agree with your P.O.V.

Sorry.

God Bless

Till all are one.

so, you denying that contextually the Greek has the "middle voice"? Since God did not prevent the Jews from accepting the Gospel in the first place, then He did not make the Gentiles accept it. If He did the latter, then He must have done the former!

 

[DeaconDean]

so, you denying that contextually the Greek has the "middle voice"? Since God did not prevent the Jews from accepting the Gospel in the first place, then He did not make the Gentiles accept it. If He did the latter, then He must have done the former!

I am not going to debate that with you.

What I have said, and what I am saying is that in Acts 13:48, there were a certain group of people, that God had "appointed"/"ordained" to eternal life.

And no matter what you say, I have provided evidence to show that "ordain" is a valid rendering.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

I am not going to debate that with you.

What I have said, and what I am saying is that in Acts 13:48, there were a certain group of people, that God had "appointed"/"ordained" to eternal life.

And no matter what you say, I have provided evidence to show that "ordain" is a valid rendering.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Sure, the typical "Reformed" response! The evidence is against what you say, and you claim to know Greek! But your "Calvinism" stops you accepting that God indeed wants the salvation of the whole human race. At least John Calvin was honest enough on John 3:16, that Jesus died for "everyone without exception" (his words)!

Good bye!

 

[DeaconDean]

Sure, the typical "Reformed" response! The evidence is against what you say, and you claim to know Greek! But your "Calvinism" stops you accepting that God indeed wants the salvation of the whole human race. At least John Calvin was honest enough on John 3:16, that Jesus died for "everyone without exception" (his words)!

Good bye!

Like I said, you are funny.

Greek and English stops you dead.

Yet just like so many other Arminians on this forum, you have to insist on taking some part in your salvation. No matter how small it may be, you played some part in bringing about your own salvation.

In the New Testament, "tasso" is only used 8 times.

And in only two places it is rendered "ordained".

Matthew 28:16: "a mountain where Jesus had appointed them."
Luke 7:8: "also am a man set under authority, having under"
Acts 13:48: "and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed."
Acts 15:2: "disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas,"
Acts 22:10: "of all things which are appointed for thee to do."
Acts 28:23: "And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him"
Romans 13:1: "the powers that be are ordained of God."
1 Corinthians 16:15: "the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the"

I would also draw your attention to The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 8:27, 1156; it also agrees with everything I have said.

And in both cases, Acts 13:48 and Rom. 13:1, they take man and his supposedly "free-will" completely out of the question.

And that, friend, has absolutely nothing to do with "Calvinism". That Bible 101!

God Bless

Till all are one.