Proof of Limited Atonement

[RTE (Road to Emmaus)]

Arminians tell us that Christ atoned for all people. Yet their "atoned" is simply another one of their semantic games, for it has no practical value of its own: an attempt to incorporate the lingo of Christianity, without the substance.


The Arminian atonement equation is this:
1. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of Atonement.


If we extrapolate by substituting where possible, we get:

2. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement].
3. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [[Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement]].
.
.
.
.
As we approach infinity, we get:

n: Atonement = acceptance of Atonement.

Clearly, an inequality and therefore null and void.






The Calvinist equation is this:

Atonement = Atonement.






Therefore Calvinists understand that the reason that not everyone goes to heaven, is that not everyone has been atoned for. Hence the "L" in "TULIP": atonement is limited to a subset of the human race.

So the limited atonement position of the Calvinist is the only element of "TULIP" that is derived via direct observation (the observation that most do not end up in Christ before they leave the earth), together with the forensic aspect of atonement and its necessary targeted/specific/particular application.

 

[chestertonrules]

Arminians tell us that Christ atoned for all people. Yet their "atoned" is simply another one of their semantic games, for it has no practical value of its own: an attempt to incorporate the lingo of Christianity, without the substance.


The Arminian atonement equation is this:
1. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of Atonement.


If we extrapolate by substituting where possible, we get:

2. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement].
3. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [[Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement]].
.
.
.
.
As we approach infinity, we get:

n: Atonement = acceptance of Atonement.

Clearly, an inequality and therefore null and void.






The Calvinist equation is this:

Atonement = Atonement.






Therefore Calvinists understand that the reason that not everyone goes to heaven, is that not everyone has been atoned for. Hence the "L" in "TULIP": atonement is limited to a subset of the human race.

So the limited atonement position of the Calvinist is the only element of "TULIP" that is derived via direct observation (the observation that most do not end up in Christ before they leave the earth), together with the forensic aspect of atonement and its necessary targeted/specific/particular application.

Fair enough. That's a semantic game, however.

Here's the central dispute, in my opinion.

Is Christ's atonement available to all who choose to follow his will or is it available only to those he chose to atone for.

Did God choose who goes to hell without regard to their actions on earth?

Calvinists say yes. All others say no.

 

[themuzicman]

Arminians tell us that Christ atoned for all people. Yet their "atoned" is simply another one of their semantic games, for it has no practical value of its own: an attempt to incorporate the lingo of Christianity, without the substance.


The Arminian atonement equation is this:
1. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of Atonement.


If we extrapolate by substituting where possible, we get:

2. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement].
3. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [[Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement]].
.
.
.
.
As we approach infinity, we get:

n: Atonement = acceptance of Atonement.

Clearly, an inequality and therefore null and void.






The Calvinist equation is this:

Atonement = Atonement.






Therefore Calvinists understand that the reason that not everyone goes to heaven, is that not everyone has been atoned for. Hence the "L" in "TULIP": atonement is limited to a subset of the human race.

So the limited atonement position of the Calvinist is the only element of "TULIP" that is derived via direct observation (the observation that most do not end up in Christ before they leave the earth), together with the forensic aspect of atonement and its necessary targeted/specific/particular application.

This is just silly.

Propitiation (atonement) was made by Christ for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2) No acceptance is necessary. All sin is propitiated

Acceptance (through faith) is necessary for justification, as it comes to all men (Rom 5:18), and is received by faith (Rom 3, Eph 2, John 6, et. al.)

Muz

 

[Van]

Calvinst arguments attempt to frame the debate in a manner than advantages the Calvinist view. What is "atonement?" No definition is provided. The word does not appear in the NASB, but can be found in one verse in the KJV. LOL

So lets back up and use reconciliation.

Calvinists argue, "Reconciliation" equals reconciliation plus receiving the reconciliation.

Obviously, these two are unequal.

To hide this they change the name to atonement. So now we have:
"Reconciliation" equals "Atonement" [reconciliation plus receiving reconciliation]

And then, to hide this fact, they charge others with playing semantic games.

Calvinism cannot be defended biblically, it is an invention of men poured into scripture using unsound methods. Among these are picking and choosing the meaning of words, saying the same word means this here but that over there to fit their doctrine into scripture, such as "all" means "all of something here but all of everything there. LOL

 

[themuzicman]

The NT uses the word "propitiation" instead of "atonement".

Muz

 

[bling]

Arminians tell us that Christ atoned for all people. Yet their "atoned" is simply another one of their semantic games, for it has no practical value of its own: an attempt to incorporate the lingo of Christianity, without the substance.


The Arminian atonement equation is this:
1. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of Atonement.


If we extrapolate by substituting where possible, we get:

2. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement].
3. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [[Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement]].
.
.
.
.
As we approach infinity, we get:

n: Atonement = acceptance of Atonement.

Clearly, an inequality and therefore null and void.






The Calvinist equation is this:

Atonement = Atonement.






Therefore Calvinists understand that the reason that not everyone goes to heaven, is that not everyone has been atoned for. Hence the "L" in "TULIP": atonement is limited to a subset of the human race.

So the limited atonement position of the Calvinist is the only element of "TULIP" that is derived via direct observation (the observation that most do not end up in Christ before they leave the earth), together with the forensic aspect of atonement and its necessary targeted/specific/particular application.

I think you need to look at Christ’s parable in Matt. 18: 21-35. The master extended forgiveness, but the servant was asking for an extension on the loan. True righteous forgiveness is a two way transaction. In the parable the Master does his part perfectly but the servant does not accept the forgiveness as grace/mercy/Love. There are lots of reasons why the servant does not accept the master’s mercy: 1. he did not ask for it, 2. no one likes to be pitied, 3. He could leave the master feeling good about himself because he was successful in getting what he wanted, 4. The fact that verse 34 he still owes the money shows the transaction did not happen (God is not an Indian Giver), 5. And the big one is the servant did not Love much after being forgiven much, which is a truism Luke 7:40-50.

 

[Rightglory]

to supporters of a Limited Atonement

Could you explain just how atonement or propitiation can be limited? Where in the Sciptures is atonement ever defined as limited, or for only some sins or particular sins possibly?
What is your theological premise that could even consider such a possibility?

 

[Eric_C]

Calvinists say yes. All others say no.

Including the Mormons and the JWs.

Why is it that all the other theological camps are united in their bitterness toward Calvin, it be...., the truth hurts.....

 

[RTE (Road to Emmaus)]

Chersterton,

Is Christ's atonement available to all who choose to follow his will or is it available only to those he chose to atone for.
You question is a tautology, so the answer should be obvious.

Those who follow His will, do so because they have been atoned for.

 

[RTE (Road to Emmaus)]

Rightglory,

What is your theological premise that could even consider such a possibility?
As I said in the OP, the doctrine of Limited Atonement is the only one of the five points of TULIP that is derived from observation, in conjunction with the forensic aspect of atonement.

That is:
1. We observe that most do not leave this earth as Christians, and that therefore they are not atoned for.
2. We understand that those who are atoned for cannot go to hell (otherwise it cannot be said that they are atoned for), and that therefore they will leave this earth as Christians (they will necessarily come to Christ before they die).

So the OP points out that the mathematical inequality that is "atonement = acceptance of atonement", is parallel to the legal inequality.

In a nutshell, atonement is between the Father and the Son. Just who is atoned for, is their business, and cannot be affected by us. That is, the atonement of the sinner is necessarily independent of the sinner.


There is a theology which goes to a deeper level on this area, but I hesitate to get into it at this stage. Suffice to say, the "L" of TULIP is an observationally-derived tenet.

 

[themuzicman]

Including the Mormons and the JWs.

Why is it that all the other theological camps are united in their bitterness toward Calvin, it be...., the truth hurts.....

Only those without a point engage in guilt by association. Just because the JWs say it doesn't make it wrong.

I wouldn't believe it BECAUSE they say it, but they aren't automatically wrong on everything.

OTOH, Your point is refuted in Scripture, and I think we DO accept that as authoritative. Thus, we can declare that you're departed from Scripture.

Muz

 

[onwingsaseagles]

Arminians tell us that Christ atoned for all people. Yet their "atoned" is simply another one of their semantic games, for it has no practical value of its own: an attempt to incorporate the lingo of Christianity, without the substance.


The Arminian atonement equation is this:
1. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of Atonement.


If we extrapolate by substituting where possible, we get:

2. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement].
3. Atonement = Atonement + acceptance of [[Atonement + acceptance of [Atonement + acceptance of Atonement]].
.
.
.
.
As we approach infinity, we get:

n: Atonement = acceptance of Atonement.

Clearly, an inequality and therefore null and void.






The Calvinist equation is this:

Atonement = Atonement.






Therefore Calvinists understand that the reason that not everyone goes to heaven, is that not everyone has been atoned for. Hence the "L" in "TULIP": atonement is limited to a subset of the human race.

So the limited atonement position of the Calvinist is the only element of "TULIP" that is derived via direct observation (the observation that most do not end up in Christ before they leave the earth), together with the forensic aspect of atonement and its necessary targeted/specific/particular application.

your problem is you are not a universalist. Calvinist say that all who Jesus atoned for will be saved, but the scripture says his sacrifice was the atonement for the whole world, for all, for every man. So you cannot believe you own definition of atonement and be a calvinist. If you definition of atonement is correct and all that Christ died for will be saved, then you must adopt the universalist belief that all will be saved.

 

[Rightglory]

RTE,

Your point #1
What has any body leaving this world as a christian or not being a christian have to do with the atonement?

We understand that those who are atoned for cannot go to hell (otherwise it cannot be said that they are atoned for), and that therefore they will leave this earth as Christians (they will necessarily come to Christ before they die).

Christ did not atone for persons. No place does it every say that a person is atoned for.
Christ atoned or propitiated sins. Sins have no personality attached. If no one either went to heaven or hell does not effect the extent of the atonement. Sin would still have been atoned for.
On the other hand if the sins of the world are atoned, which they are, by your statement everyone would be of necessity in heaven.

In a nutshell, atonement is between the Father and the Son. Just who is atoned for, is their business, and cannot be affected by us. That is, the atonement of the sinner is necessarily independent of the sinner.

nobody is atoned for, but sins only. Your are right, man has no effect whatsoever on the atonement. This is an act of God, through Christ, as a solution for dealing with sin in this world. Man cannot effect it, cannot change it in any way.

There is a theology which goes to a deeper level on this area, but I hesitate to get into it at this stage. Suffice to say, the "L" of TULIP is an observationally-derived tenet.

clearly a faulty one since it is not observable.
To make it limited the scriptures would of necessity need to state which sins, or class of sins or only half of the sins, but it does not. It says, "the sins of the world" If one single sin is propitiated, every sin is of necessity propitiated.

 

[squint]

When observing atonement/propitiation it is more of a question of ATTRIBUTION.

God in Christ does NOT attribute SINS to MANKIND. This does not mean that SINS no longer exist or have been eradicated. They are NOT ATTRIBUTED to mankind:

2 Corinthians 5:19
that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

The "Calvinists" are most obviously STILL COUNTING....I do not attribute their "counting sins" against mankind to THEM, but to that working of darkness that we all carry in our flesh.

And that brings us to more interesting points about atonement.

The devil is fully implicated in ALL SINS:

1 John 3:
8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

There is no scripture that records the devil getting off the hook for SINS. So in this way the ATONEMENT is LIMITED.

Atonement is for MANKIND. Atonement is NOT for THE DEVIL.

The DEVIL was shown by Jesus to be IN mankind. It was IN MANKIND that Jesus performed THE SEPARATION of DEVIL(s) from MANKIND.

It is IN MANKIND that THE DEVIL SINS.

Rev. 9:
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

Satan, THE DEVIL continues his perpetual accusations toward mankind IN MANKIND. And the primary place that transpires is IN THE CHURCHes. Even within Christian Universalism "believers" STILL blame and accuse believing or unbelieving mankind for SINS...

It is RIGHT and PROPER that the accuser of our fellow man is heard IN THE CHURCHES, as Jesus TESTIFIED that would transpire:

Matthew 13:19
When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.

Mark 4:15
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.


Matthew 13:38
The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one

It doesn't take a whole lot of genius to figure out "why" the churches are SOOOOO divided. Satan has A FIELD DAY where the Word is SOWN.

And we're all just SOOOO busy blaming and accusing EACH OTHER....but you see that IS the work of the WICKED ONES

Practice what you preach:

IF you want to "prove yourself" as a CHILD OF GOD rather than A SLAVE OF THE DEVIL, then THIS MUST transpire in YOU:

Matthew 6:15
But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Matthew 12:31
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men

Mark 3:28
Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme

None of us can walk this present earth as a BELIEVER and COUNT SINS against our fellow man. It just CANNOT BE DONE.

We can however look to the BLAMER AND ACCUSER of our fellow man who are FOUND in mankind and openly SEE THAT WICKED ONE working away.

That is the "curse" of the "earth," our BODIES. It is there that the TARE grows. No believer likes to hear this, but it's just a FACT that we have to "live with."

enjoy!

squint

 

[RTE (Road to Emmaus)]

Rightglory,



Christ did not atone for persons. No place does it every say that a person is atoned for.
Christ atoned or propitiated sins. Sins have no personality attached.
Sins are committed by sinners. There is no such thing as sinnerless sins.



I have noticed that most in this forum do not know the OT. You among them. You need a good stiff dose of Torah. Here is your first table-spoon:

"And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement FOR HIM." (Le 1:4)


Without an understanding of the OT, you are prone to these sorts of silly ideas you have come up with here.

 

[RTE (Road to Emmaus)]

Squint,

God in Christ does NOT attribute SINS to MANKIND.
Yes He does. That is why He calls them "sinners".


that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them
"men’s" = "men in Christ".



You are obviously one who has had a loved one die without Christ, and are seeking to convince yourself in your mind of his/her ultimate salvation. Time to stop squinting at verses, and look at the big picture, Squint. Time to move off the emotion, and on to the Spirit.

 

[themuzicman]

Rightglory,



Christ did not atone for persons. No place does it every say that a person is atoned for.
Christ atoned or propitiated sins. Sins have no personality attached.
Sins are committed by sinners. There is no such thing as sinnerless sins.



I have noticed that most in this forum do not know the OT. You among them. You need a good stiff dose of Torah. Here is your first table-spoon:

"And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement FOR HIM." (Le 1:4)


Without an understanding of the OT, you are prone to these sorts of silly ideas you have come up with here.

Christ's propitiation isn't like OT atonement. OT atonement had to be made repeatedly, and was done on an individual basis.

Christ's propitiation was done once for all sins committed by all men. (1 John 2:2, Rom 5:18)

Muz

 

[squint]

Squint,

God in Christ does NOT attribute SINS to MANKIND.
Yes He does. That is why He calls them "sinners".

Where mankind alone in the flesh you'd have a point to rail upon them and condemn them to burn alive forever. Jesus showed us however that mankind is NOT alone. If you missed that part what can I say other than that you "could" deliver your fellow man the benefit of the doubt and hope you get the same measure.

that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them
"men’s" = "men in Christ".

Er, uh...let's see..."world" "men"

RTE= Doesn't fit my imposition so I'll add what "I" like instead.

You are obviously one who has had a loved one die without Christ,

You haven't?

and are seeking to convince yourself in your mind of his/her ultimate salvation.

No, I happen to believe that God Is The Saviour of ALL MEN...not "all types" of men. ala 2 Tim. 4:10.

Time to stop squinting at verses, and look at the big picture, Squint. Time to move off the emotion, and on to the Spirit.

Love tells me quite clearly that Love does NO ILL nor does LOVE keep record of wrongs. That's Divine Superiority of Spirit.

enjoy!

squint

 

[Rightglory]

RTE,

Sins are committed by sinners. There is no such thing as sinnerless sins.

All sins are committed by sinners, but there is no personality to them. It is not the person that was attoned, but sins.

"And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement FOR HIM." (Le 1:4)

Whether that person in the OT commited one sin or a million sins, they were attoned. That animal could have attoned for a lot more sins that was given to it. There is not a number of sins and when we might run out of our number that our additional sins will no longer be atoned.
Christ is the ONCE sacrifice. He attoned for sin period. One sin, many sins, all sins. There is not quanity involved. It is sin, period.

Without an understanding of the OT, you are prone to these sorts of silly ideas you have come up with here

and your view ends up not being scriptural because it is based on your faulty personal opinion of what you would like it to be to fit a presupposition. Atonement has never been limited, relative to sins themselves or the people who could appropriate its benefits.

 

[Rightglory]

themuzicman,

Christ's propitiation isn't like OT atonement. OT atonement had to be made repeatedly, and was done on an individual basis.

That is the whole point RTE wants also. This is his mistake and most protestants mistake relative to the difference. In the OT, the sacrifice was made simultaneously with the forgiveness of sins. Those present had their sins placed upon the sacrifice and they would then be propitiated and forgiven.
However, Christ was a single, permanent sacrifice for sin. There is no forgiveness in the act of propitiation itself. This is why Christ is also the current High Priest. Our sins can be forgiven, ONLY because they have already been propitiated. Christ did not forgive a single sin on the Cross. He propitiated all sin. His sacrifice is sufficient to forgive every sin every commited and then multiplied by a million or whatever number you wish as well as untold individuals who bring their sins to Him for forgiveness. That is why He is the mediator between God and man relative to sins. He is the current High Priest and can forgive your sins. They were not forgiven on the Cross. Sins not repented of, not confess are retained by you. This is why those who do not believe are already condemmed because they have not sought reconciliation through repentance and confession.
It is impossible, theologically to even consider any limitation to the sacrifice of Christ. It was a complete sacrifice for sin, period.

Christ's propitiation was done once for all sins committed by all men. (1 John 2:2, Rom 5:18)

See above explanation. Both sides of the extreme are incorrect. One - that it can even be thought as limited in any shape or form.
Two- that atonement means forgiveness. If so, based on your text above, we are all Universalist in that every sin has already been forgiven and we are all pure and holy and might just as well be in heaven now. Yet the reality is quite different as is Scripture.