Are you a universalist or do you believe in limited attonement?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Dale-c, Mar 26, 2008.

  1. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Calvinists are not the only ones who believe in a limited attonement.
    I would suggest that virtually all on this forum believe in some form of limited attonement, except the univeralists that believe all will be saved, whether they believe or not.

    the key is that Calvinists believe that the attonement is UNLIMITED for for the elect but was not intended for the non elect.
    To put it another way, Every sin of the elect, even of unbelief was attoned for.
    No sin is covered for the lost.

    The common anti calvinist believes that the intent of people of the attonement is UNLIMITED but the attonement is actually limited by the people who do not believe.
    To put it another way, all sin of the unbeliever (all unbelievers) is covered except the sin of unbelief.
    Then the attonement is limited by those that do not believe.

    So there you have it:
    Either you have men limiting the attonement or you have God limiting the attonement.
    :tonofbricks:
     
  2. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Or you have people who do not understand the fact that Christ died for the sins of the whole world.

    Christ died for all... all were dead
    Some came to Christ, some rejected Him.

    That does not mean He did not die for them.
     
  3. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please see the other thread as this is redundant.
     
  4. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,186
    Likes Received:
    371
    I was just wondering about this. If Christ died for all men, and took all man's sin to the cross, then why do people go to hell?

    Or is it that He took all sin to the cross but man must accept that sacrifice for themselves in order to be saved?

    Or WAS it the sins of every person or a general "world"?

    LOL - It's late and I'm not thinking straight so I'm just asking a bunch of questions. :D
     
  5. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    They go to hell for rejecting Christ... with their sins paid for.
     
  6. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    All of their sins or just all but their rejection of Christ?

    If their rejection of Christ was paid for then why are they going to hell?
     
  7. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, this is what I think. I posted it in the other thread but it was ignored.

    Christ is the "passover" lamb that was told about in the OT. When the lamb was slain, the blood had to applied to the doorposts in order for death to pass by (salvation).

    Now, Christ is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, the true passover lamb. The sacrifice has been made, the Lamb has been slain, but His blood must be applied for salvation to take place.

    Applying the blood to the doorposts in the OT required faith.

    Applying the blood to our lives and our hearts requires faith.


    Same thing now as in the OT, but the true Lamb has been sacrificed for the sins of the world.
     
  8. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amy, then you believe that Christ did not specifically pay for the sins of those who are in hell?
    You believe He died to make there salvation possible, to make the payment possible, but without hte application the payment is never actually made?

    This is what Tim beleves. It is a consistent posisition.
    I believed it to for many years.
     
  9. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,186
    Likes Received:
    371
    That's kind of what I was thinking. The slain lamb wouldn't have done much good without the blood on the doorposts.
     
  10. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you are saying that Christ did NOT actually pay for the sins of the lost (or anyone for that matter) on the cross but that He made the payment possible?
    then each person must apply the attonement by their belief?
     
  11. standingfirminChrist

    standingfirminChrist
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    The payment was made, dale. Whether the people accepted it or not.
     
  12. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, your not listening. Christ is the propitiation, the substitutionary Lamb. Just as the OT Sacrifice of Atonment was made on behalf of ALL of Isreal not all of Israel was saved but those who believed. Amy is spot on regarding the passover Lamb illistration.

    Do you believe that Christ death paid for all sin right then and there (in time)? If so then do you believe the elect is born saved and righteous? If not, you have problem in your view because I know that even you know that view is incorrect.
    Now your getting it :)

    The propitiation of Christ is applied via faith (Rom 3:25).
    Did not Christ's death justify the elect?
    Did you know that you are justified by faith?
     
    #12 Allan, Mar 26, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 26, 2008
  13. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think Christ's payment for sin (in His blood) is the same as the blood of the passover lamb which had to be applied to each household on the doorposts. It was done in faith.
    Christ has shed His blood, but without faith in His sacrifice, it won't be applied to each person.

    God did not apply the blood to each household Himself. It had to be done by the people because of their faith in what God said. They could either believe death would pass by if the blood was on the doorposts and live, or they could reject it and die.
     
  14. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Allan beat me to it. :laugh:
     
  15. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually Dale, you are incorrect in your assumption. Also you already have created a thread (in Jan of this year) after the same question here: http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=46089&page=4
    Which was shortly after TCGreek made one before that:
    The answer still have not changed :)

    I will post the same thing I gave to TCGreek on his thread:
     
    #15 Allan, Mar 26, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 26, 2008
  16. convicted1

    convicted1
    Expand Collapse
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    9,011
    Likes Received:
    3
    Re: Unlimited atonement or universalist?

    People, people, people, people........shame!!! Everytime something like this comes up, the same scriptures(from both sides of this argument) gets brought up...and each side refutes what the others say. It's a "Never Ending Story", and neither side is willing to budge.

    Here's the way "Ole Willis" sees it. Those who are saved go to heaven, those who die lost go to hell. One will be "ever with the Lord", the other one will be cast into outer darkness. It all boils down to being saved or not.

    To borrow a saying from Bro TCGreek, here's the rub. The problem isn't about being saved, but who is saved, versus those who can't be saved. I believe all can be saved, after God begins dealing with them. It's when they refuse the "drawing" of God, thst some think differntly. Some believe that the "Elect" only, will not refuse, while others say they can. I look at it like this, if you lined 10,000 people up in a row, you couldn't tell me, or anyone, who is "elect", or who is "non-elect". This is the biggest problem with the argument of elect vs. non-elect. I am thankful that God saved me, and if anyone else goes where I am going, will have to do the same thing...repent of their sins.

    Willis
     
  17. dan e.

    dan e.
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    ....because those are clearly the only two options....:praying:
     
  18. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Does no one else feel insulted by this title? "Are you a universalist or do you believe in limited attonement?" My answer is "No" and "No." So obviously there is nothing for me to discuss on this thread.

    Thank God that preaching yesterday and today at Youth Camp God saw fit to save a teenager and help another offer herself as a living sacrifice. To God be the glory! Ya'll really need to get out more--and proclaim the Lord to the lost, whichever side of this argument you are on.

    I've had my say. Now the same old people can go back to the same old arguments, repeated who knows how many times on the BB.
     
  19. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bingo! And thus you have just limited the atonement! You say it is limited not by Christ but by those who refuse to reviece it.
    Thus you believe that Christ died to make salvation possible for every single person that would ever live but it was secure for no one unless they acted in belief on their own part.
     
  20. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Apparently you don't understand.
    The Atonment made was made FOR ALL, it was not made for a limited amount of people. A limited amount of people will receive it (be redeemed) but the Atonement made was for ALL.

    No. That is what you are saying but it is not uncommon since you don't or wont understand what others are 'actually saying'. IOW - You keep trying to reword what they say according to or in light of your own view and understanding.

    You keep adding and twisting what is said. Who ever stated anything about the Atonment for people due to them acting in belief 'on their own part' ??
    Answer: only Dale-c.

    The purpose of the atonment is; it was made for everyone, to be receive in faith by anyone, through the someone of Jesus Christ.

    Do you not know that the Atonment by itself does not secure anything?? If it did you would be saved before you were born!!
    However scripture states that the propitiantion is received 'by faith (Rom 3:25) and that we are justified not by the Atonment made but 'by faith' in the Atonment. We are justified 'by faith'.

    Therefore - Atonment is not limited but Redemption is! :smilewinkgrin:
     
    #20 Allan, Mar 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 29, 2008

Share This Page

Loading...