Sufficient vs Necessary

[cygnusx1]

That's nice.

The Bible says that God saves those who believe (1 Cor 1:21). I like it succinct.

Actually, man is snot saved "by being united to Christ". Union with Christ is what the Holy Spirit does to the believer (already saved).

Atonement has nothing to do with salvation. Christ atoned for the sins of everyone because the Bible tells us that He died for everyone.

The ability to believe is from grace, but that ability doesn't save us. God saves the believer.

Yes, Christ is our Substitute. He took the place of mankind on the cross and paid for all of mankind's sins. 1 Jn 2:2 says so.

Your last point: "this atonement is saving, it is to be received by faith" is untrue.

We don't "receive atonement", nor does atonement save. If that were so, even in RT Christ's death already saved all He died for, rendering the act of faith null and void. Yet the Bible teaches very clearly that we are saved through faith.

And Paul's answer to the jailer who asked what he MUST DO to be saved is clear: believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you WILL BE SAVED.

iow, no one is saved UNTIL they believe. But your statements conclude that Christ's atonement saves those He atoned for. So even if He had only died for the elect, then they would already be saved. That means you and I would have been born saved. That is wrong.

Stunning !

Given your views , If Christ had not died could sinners still be SAVED ?


Romans 3:25 KJV
King James Version
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past , through the forbearance of God;

Romans 3:25 NIV
New International Version
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished--


Romans 3:25 RSV
Revised Standard Version
whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins;

 

[shturt678s]

Stunning !

Given your views , If Christ had not died could sinners still be SAVED ?


Romans 3:25 KJV
King James Version
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past , through the forbearance of God;

Romans 3:25 NIV
New International Version
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished--


Romans 3:25 RSV
Revised Standard Version
whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins;

Rom.3:25, "God set forth as cover of the mercy seat through the faith in His blood," ie, "a propitiation" is an inferior rendering. Contextlually we're delcared righteous wholly apart from the law and works of the law, ie, what Christ was made for us, ie, Christ as a mercy seat. :o

Definitely not a propitiation which means a sacrifice that turns God's wrath into favour here, ie, more to do with the law?

Old Jack

 

[cygnusx1]

Rom.3:25, "God set forth as cover of the mercy seat through the faith in His blood," ie, "a propitiation" is an inferior rendering. Contextlually we're delcared righteous wholly apart from the law and works of the law, ie, what Christ was made for us, ie, Christ as a mercy seat. :o

Definitely not a propitiation which means a sacrifice that turns God's wrath into favour here, ie, more to do with the law?

Old Jack

Gods law is not so easily flung away , Christ dies as a sinner , the wages of sin is death . Christ came under the Law , born into the house of Israel Under The Law , fulfilling the Law in His Life and By His Death , and certainly a propitiation to be received by faith , examine typology .


Romans 3:25


American Standard Version
whom God set forth [to be] a propitiation, through faith, in his blood, to show his righteousness because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God;

 

[FreeGrace2]

Given your views , If Christ had not died could sinners still be SAVED ?

Of course NOT. Sin HAD to be paid for BEFORE God will save anyone.

Romans 3:25 KJV
King James Version
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past , through the forbearance of God;

Romans 3:25 NIV
New International Version
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished--


Romans 3:25 RSV
Revised Standard Version
whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins;[/QUOTE]
One must believe in Christ for eternal life to be saved. And it is only by His death (blood) that God will save people.

btw, what was so "stunning" for you?

 

[cygnusx1]

Of course NOT. Sin HAD to be paid for BEFORE God will save anyone.

Romans 3:25 KJV
King James Version
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past , through the forbearance of God;

Romans 3:25 NIV
New International Version
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished--


Romans 3:25 RSV
Revised Standard Version
whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins;


One must believe in Christ for eternal life to be saved. And it is only by His death (blood) that God will save people.

btw, what was so "stunning" for you? V

So Christs death does save men now !

Also receiving by faith the atonement you also now accept ?

Or can't you follow ?

 

[shturt678s]

Gods law is not so easily flung away , Christ dies as a sinner ,

I think you meant that although sinless, Christ bore our sin and its curse in His human nature.

the wages of sin is death . Christ came under the Law , born into the house of Israel Under The Law , fulfilling the Law in His Life and By His Death , and certainly a propitiation to be received by faith , examine typology.

Somewhat familiar with "Typology," however has been a long time. Rom.3:25, "as a cover of the mercy seat," ie, covering sins idea rather than being enemies of God idea at Rom.5:10, ie, more of a covering of sins than addressing the Atonement dealing with being enemies of His wrath thus "Propitiation" is an inferior rendering.

Romans 3:25


American Standard Version
whom God set forth [to be] a propitiation, through faith, in his blood, to show his righteousness because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God;

Old Jack

 

[cygnusx1]

I think you meant that although sinless, Christ bore our sin and its curse in His human nature.

I mean although Christ was sinless he died as a sinner , a sinners death , he became sin ! Remember why Christ instructed Peter to buy a sword then forbade him to use it .....

Somewhat familiar with "Typology," however has been a long time. Rom.3:25, "as a cover of the mercy seat," ie, covering sins idea rather than being enemies of God idea at Rom.5:10, ie, more of a covering of sins than addressing the Atonement dealing with being enemies of His wrath thus "Propitiation" is an inferior rendering.

Think of the typology of the scapegoat , sin offering , one male goat killed the other had the blood of the first placed upon its head and was driven out to die in the wilderness , the first is to propitiate the second to expiate . Both done under Gods Law . The law has everything to do with Christ's death .

 

[FreeGrace2]

So Christs death does save men now !

So, no, I've never said that. Apparently you're not understanding anything I post.

Also receiving by faith the atonement you also now accept ?

Again, no.

Or can't you follow ?

I'm thinking it's the other way around as to who isn't actually following here.

I don't see any relevance between your comments and my posts. If there is, please explain how so.

 

[cygnusx1]

So, no, I've never said that. Apparently you're not understanding anything I post.


Again, no.


I'm thinking it's the other way around as to who isn't actually following here.

I don't see any relevance between your comments and my posts. If there is, please explain how so.

Then why quote Romans 3:25 after I quoted it several times , you don't seem to be able to follow the link between salvation by faith in Christ's blood (atonement )

 

[cygnusx1]

"There are many who plead for the atonement of Christ, who, in effect, deny it, as well as its open opposers. They suppose that it is a conditional atonement, of efficacy only to those who comply with certain terms. It is evident, however, that a conditional atonement is no atonement in the proper sense of the word; for an atonement must expiate the sins atoned for, just as a payment cancels a debt. Where, then, there has been an actual atonement made, the sins atoned for never can be punished again, any more than a debt once paid can be charged a second time. It would be unjust in God to charge the debt to the account of man that was fully paid by man's Surety. It may be alleged that one man may pay another man's debt upon certain conditions; and that if those conditions are not fulfilled, the debt will be still chargeable upon the debtor. But it is evident that, in such a case, the surety either does not actually pay the debt till the conditions are fulfilled, or if he has conditionally paid it, he is refunded before it is chargeable upon the debtor. In every such case, the debt is not really paid. But Jesus has paid the debt. He has already made atonement; and if they for whom He died are not absolved, the debt is charged a second time. Christ can never be refunded.His blood has been shed; and there is no possibility that what He suffered can be now either more or less. They, then, who suspend the efficacy of the atonement of Christ upon conditions to be complied with by man, in effect deny that atonement has been truly made" (Alex. Carson, 1847).

 

[cygnusx1]

Of course NOT. Sin HAD to be paid for BEFORE God will save anyone.

The death of Christ works through all time God can and did save men BEFORE The price of sin was paid.

 

[Epiphoskei]

Of course NOT. Sin HAD to be paid for BEFORE God will save anyone.

If all sin has been paid for, then what is the moral justification for God damning certain individuals when he judges the world?

 

[cygnusx1]

Edit

 

[FreeGrace2]

Then why quote Romans 3:25 after I quoted it several times , you don't seem to be able to follow the link between salvation by faith in Christ's blood (atonement )

The key here is "salvation BY FAITH in Christ's blood". Not salvation by Christ's blood. Do you see the difference here?

 

[FreeGrace2]

The death of Christ works through all time God can and did save men BEFORE The price of sin was paid.

What is your point here?

Before Christ died on the cross, God saved men who believed in the promise of eternal life through the Messiah who was yet to come.

iow, the OT looked forward to the cross, and after the cross, we look back to the cross.

Though it appears you may not think so, we're on the same page.

 

[FreeGrace2]

If all sin has been paid for, then what is the moral justification for God damning certain individuals when he judges the world?

They are damned for not having His free gift of eternal life. In order to live with God, one must be qualified (Col 1:12) to do so. The gift of eternal life is what qualifies us. Thos who didn't receive by faith that free gift are not qualified to live with God forever, and there is only one other "place" in eternity to exist; the lake of fire, with Lucifer and his angels.

I'm not sure there is a "moral justification" for damnation. God promises eternal life (1 Jn 2:25). Those who believe Him receive it. Those who don't believe Him, don't.

What's wrong with my view?

 

[cygnusx1]

What is your point here?

Before Christ died on the cross, God saved men who believed in the promise of eternal life through the Messiah who was yet to come.

iow, the OT looked forward to the cross, and after the cross, we look back to the cross.

Though it appears you may not think so, we're on the same page.

So now you don't believe your original statement :

"Of course NOT. Sin HAD to be paid for BEFORE God will save anyone." FG2

Good , glad we cleared that up

 

[FreeGrace2]

So now you don't believe your original statement :

"Of course NOT. Sin HAD to be paid for BEFORE God will save anyone." FG2

Good , glad we cleared that up

Interesting how you failed to actually quote my "original statement", nor any other statement, yet lob charges that you haven't proven.

I'm glad to clear THAT up.

Please don't keep lobbing charges, unless you provide evidence that I have contradicted myself.

Way more likely is that you haven't understood my view. So you're not in a position to critique it.

Once my view does become clear, then be my guest. I look forward to it.

 

[Epiphoskei]

They are damned for not having His free gift of eternal life. In order to live with God, one must be qualified (Col 1:12) to do so. The gift of eternal life is what qualifies us. Thos who didn't receive by faith that free gift are not qualified to live with God forever, and there is only one other "place" in eternity to exist; the lake of fire, with Lucifer and his angels.

I'm not sure there is a "moral justification" for damnation. God promises eternal life (1 Jn 2:25). Those who believe Him receive it. Those who don't believe Him, don't.

What's wrong with my view?

For one thing, if there's no moral justification for God damning individuals, then God is an unjust judge.

Do we really have to have a debate over basic points of orthodoxy here? Christian doctrine, as made abundantly clear in scripture, teaches that men commit sins, and these sins cause them to be worthy of eternal death. God judges the world on the last day, and men are either justified before God, which is to say, are eternally saved, or they are found wicked, which is to say, are damned. The notion that God forgave everyone but still punishes them with the second death is tantamount to accusing a judge of corruption.

The qualification to share in the saints' inheritance in the verse you quote is the forgiveness of sins, as Paul makes clear in the next verse, "In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins." Forgiveness does not permit redemption, but rather it is redemption. By removing our offense, we stand righteous before God, and when we are judged, cannot be condemned.

Remember, damnation is just another Latin word for condemnation. What moral justification could God have for condemning one who is justified?

 

[cygnusx1]

Interesting how you failed to actually quote my "original statement", nor any other statement, yet lob charges that you haven't proven.

I'm glad to clear THAT up.

Please don't keep lobbing charges, unless you provide evidence that I have contradicted myself.

Way more likely is that you haven't understood my view. So you're not in a position to critique it.

Once my view does become clear, then be my guest. I look forward to it.

Why say I failed to quote you , here it is again , yes it's you , these things are quote marks " "

"Of course NOT. Sin HAD to be paid for BEFORE God will save anyone." FreeGrace2

So is this your statement or not ?

Do you agree with your quoted statement ?