|
Posts: 3,463
Joined: September 2003
|
|
|
|
Forums31
Topics8,348
Posts56,543
Members992
| |
Most Online2,383
Jan 12th, 2026
|
|
|
#36599
Tue May 22, 2007 8:06 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176 |
Dearly beloved, This has been an extremely difficult question for me to answer for many years and I have found myself hovering between Limited and Unlimited Atonement. I listened to a debate recently on this very topic and though the two gentlemen were from either side of the argument they were deeply respectful and though I never got to hear how it played out, the gentleman who was explaining the position of Limited Atonement really had a far better presentation and ultimately the other gentleman who stood for four point Calvinism was not really that convinced of his own position and did not really have strong theological argument. I have corresponded with the webmaster of a site on and off, but mostly off for a number of years. Tonight I came upon this full length article about Unlimited Atonement and felt a little like the fella who was lost for words. I really would like to lay this to rest fully and finally, so if you have time to read this article and help me reach a better understanding of the Atonement, I would be GREATLY appreciative. There is no hurry, I just want to end this war in my skull! The link is : http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/atonment.htmI am very exited to read your replies. His servant.
Last edited by straw; Tue May 22, 2007 8:08 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274
Head Honcho
|
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274 |
Straw, I would boldly suggest that all you would ever need to answer your question, "Definite Atonement vs. Indefinite Atonement" can be found here: The Atonement of the Lord Christ. In fact, from the perspective of simple logic, John Owen's most famous statement is more than convincing. See here: For Whom Did Christ Die?. Should you have questions concerning a specific passage of Scripture which is not covered in the articles linked to above, feel free to ask away. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> In His grace,
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif) simul iustus et peccator![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Needs to get a Life
|
|
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856 |
Straw,
The classic Bible passage cited to prove a limited extent to the atonement is the tenth chapter of the Gospel of John in which Jesus uses Ancient Near Eastern shepherding practices as a metaphor for his relationship to his followers. A shepherd of those times would call his sheep from a mix of flocks, and his sheep would hearken to his voice and follow, while the sheep of other flocks would ignore any but their own shepherd's voice (John 10:1-5). In that context, Jesus says, "I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me,...and I lay down my life for the sheep" (vv. 14-15, ESV), and he tells the Pharisees that they "do not believe because [they] are not part of [his] flock" (v. 26). He continues, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand" (vv. 27f). Since Calvinists and nearly all Christians believe that not all have eternal life with God (based on the Sermon on the Mount among other passages), Calvinists conclude that either Jesus was wrong in saying that he would lose none of his sheep (a conclusion they reject) or that Jesus must not have died for everyone. Formally, the Calvinist position can be expressed thusly:
1. Jesus lays down his life for the sheep. (John 10:14-15)
2. Jesus will lose none of his sheep. (John 10:28)
3. Many people will not receive eternal life. (Matthew 7:13-14)
Therefore, Jesus did not die for everyone but only for those who will ultimately be saved.
Additionally, in the high priestly prayer, Jesus prays for the protection and sanctification of those who believed in him, and he explicitly excludes praying for all: "I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours" (John 17:9b). St. Paul instructs the elders in Ephesus "to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood" (Acts 20:28, NASB), and he says in his letter to the same church that "Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her" (Ephesians 5:25, ESV, emphasis added). Likewise, Jesus foreshadows that he will lay down his life "for his friends" (John 15:13; compare 10:15), and an angel tells Jesus' earthly father Joseph that he "will save His people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21). Calvinists believe that these passages demonstrate that Jesus died for the church (that is, the elect) only.
.
When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Prince of Glory died, my richest gain I count but loss and pour contempt on all my pride. - Isaac Watts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,892 Likes: 48
Needs to get a Life
|
|
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,892 Likes: 48 |
The article mentions prevenient grace, but I ask you to show me where the Scriptures teach prevenient grace?
If you think you have found this from Scripture, by all means post it and let us discuss these verses.
This seems to be the author's main point, to which the whole arguement stands or falls.
In Pilgrim's post you will notice the link to something John Owen wrote. If you haven't already done so, I highly recommend that you read it.
By the way Wes did an excellent job of showing from Scripture "Limited Atonement".
Tom
Last edited by Tom; Wed May 23, 2007 1:22 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176 |
Thank-you Pilgrim, Wes and Tom. I am going to create a special folder (physical) for this EXCELLENT reply.
Tom,
This is the first time I have heard of 'prevenient grace'.
Wes,
Thank-you so much for clearly explaining 'Limited Atonement' (I am going to print it out right now)
Pilgrim,
I am going to the link for John Owen's 'For whom did Christ die', now! and will certainly work through the archive on 'The Atonement.' I have quite a bit of time on my hands so I am going to really enjoy this.
His servant,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,892 Likes: 48
Needs to get a Life
|
|
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,892 Likes: 48 |
Straw said: Tom,
This is the first time I have heard of 'prevenient grace'. Just in case you don't know what the term means. In a nut shell it means that "all" are given the ability to either accept or reject Christ as their Lord and savior. But it is dependant on them on whether or not they do. Logically then, (although Arminians deny it) salvation is an act of both God and man working together. Not the biblical position that says salvation is all of God. Tom
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176 |
Thanks Tom. What do you think of the following transcript of a debate between between an Arminian and John W. Hendryx, webmaster of the Calvinist site Monergism.org ? Why Does One Person Choose God and Not Another?He recently added a conclusion, which I found quite interesting: Conclusion: if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, "What have you that you did not receive?" (1 Cor. 4:7), and, "But by the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10). If anyone affirms that we can form any right opinion or make any right choice which relates to the salvation of eternal life, or that we can be saved by assent to the preaching of the gospel through our natural powers without the effectual work of the Holy Spirit, who makes all whom He calls gladly and willingly assent to and believe in the truth, he is led astray from the plain teaching of Scripture by exalting the natural ability of man, and does not understand the voice of God who says in the Gospel, "For apart from me you can do nothing" (John 15:5), and the word of the Apostle, "Not that we are competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence is from God" (2 Cor. 3:5). - Adapted from The Counsel of Orange (529 AD)
Last edited by straw; Thu May 24, 2007 5:57 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176 |
Hi Tom, I had a brief conversation with the webmaster of BSM and he mentioned 1 John 2:2 - After reading several commentaries, and in particular John Gill, I can see where it is easy to go astray with the understanding of this passage. (especially when one is wanting to motivate for 'unlimited atonement', and to a lesser degree 'prevenient grace') I have read the John Owen argument from reason and I am not saying I am not convinced but it does not much to remove the obstacles placed in the way by certain awkward passages like the one I just mentioned. I know I am probably going to wrapped on the knuckles for this one and told to read the Canons of Dordt. (I am working through them..slowly) This is what I discovered on a pretty good presentation of 'Unlimited Atonement' at Wikipedia. (It never fails to amaze me the detail that this online encyclopaedia is achieving. Even full discographies for lesser know musicians...no I am not there yet. :-) ) These are the verses I discovered: Scriptures used to support
These are Scriptures commonly used by those who support Unlimited atonement:
John 3:14-18 - "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
2 Cor 5:14-15 - "For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died; and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again."
1 Timothy 2:3-6 - For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time."
1 Timothy 4:10 - "For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe."
Titus 2:11 (ESV) - "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people."
2 Peter 3:9 (KJV) - "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
1 John 2:2 - "And He [Christ] Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world." They also present the passages that I have read mentioned in favour of Limited Atonement. (I am also working through the list of articles and have been graciously granted another list by John Hendryx of Monergism, so I have some reading to do.) Kewl. I look forward to your response to the passages alluding to the Unlimited position. Orphaned,
Last edited by straw; Fri May 25, 2007 1:52 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274
Head Honcho
|
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274 |
Straw, There can be little doubt that 1 John 2:2 is one of the all-time favorite passages quoted by those who embrace "Indefinite Atonement" (aka: Universal Atonement). The problem most always comes down to improper exegesis of a passage/text. And so it is with this verse that it is rendered wrongly to mean something it was never intended to teach. Probably the best exegetical study on this text and several others which are likewise used in defense of "Indefinite Atonement" was done by Dr. Gary Long. You can read that study here: Exegetical Study of IJh 2:2. <script language="JavaScript" src="includes/ubbt_blink.js"></script><span id="blink"><blink><font size="5"> <font face="Comic Sans MS">ENJOY!!</font></font></blink></span><script language="JavaScript">blink();</script> In His grace,
simul iustus et peccator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176 |
Yo Pilgrim,
I am consistently amazed at quality of content that is on this site.
Part of the reason why these passages are defended so by those who go for the Unlimited Atonement, is the same reason that Jehovah's Witnesses do. They just have to make the passages say whatever they believe. The other reason is blindness in part, they just cannot see it because they cannot believe that the Atonement is paid in full, for the elect, by His blood upon the cross.
I have made this my homepage (out of ink) and because I have a tight schedule tonight and I will read it on Saturday morning...instead of watching the rugby.
I normally hate watching rugby, having played it at school, but the Blue Bulls vs The Crusaders, and the Bulls vs the Sharks, was some pretty interesting rugby. Ok. It was raining and so I did a most unnerdy thing....I think I might be getting hooked, watch out Al Bundy...got to get of the couch.
His servant,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274
Head Honcho
|
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274 |
straw said:
....I think I might be getting hooked, watch out Al Bundy...got to get off the couch. The favorite pasttime of the western world: ![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/couch_potato.gif) ![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/mutley.gif)
simul iustus et peccator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,892 Likes: 48
Needs to get a Life
|
|
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,892 Likes: 48 |
Straw
I noticed that the Arminian (Roger) thinks the God that Calvinists believe in, is an unloving God.
He plays on the emotions and to be quite frank, that is an obstacle that I had to get over before I became a Calvinist.
In my case (though I didn't realize it at the time) the reason why I had a hard time embracing Calvinism is because of the faulty understanding of God that Arminianism teaches. Mainly that we should look at Scripture through our own eyes.
When we do this however, when we read passages like Romans chapter 9 (i.e. verse 13) we end up having to put a different understanding on the passage in order to keep our understanding of God than the Bible actually intended.
The true way to read the Scriptures is through the eyes of our sovereign God. He is God not us. Only when we learn to do this will be able to see the whole truth.
Question: When you read passages like Romans chapter 9, are you reading them through your own conception of God or just letting the Scriptures speak for themselves (in context of course)?
If it is through your own conception of God, then you will not be able to take the insult. But if it is the later, then you will start to see the sovereign God as He is.
Funny thing is, when I finally started reading the Scriptures properly, my former thoughts about the Calvinist understanding of God, began to melt away.
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 176 |
Yes Tom. Exactly. 'Letting God be God', now that is a good start. ![[Linked Image]](http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/aeryck/Blindman.gif)
Last edited by straw; Sat May 26, 2007 1:04 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
384
guests, and
48
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
|
