in Arminianism wsa Deah of Christ just "potentially for sinners?"

Discussion in 'Calvinism/Arminianism Debate' started by Yeshua1, Oct 28, 2013.

  1. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,023
    Likes Received:
    47
    As His death did not secure salvation for any, just bought all a chance to be saved now?
     
  2. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    1 John 2:2 God sent His Son to be the "Atoning Sacrifice for OUR sins and NOT for OUR sins only but for the SINS of the WHOLE WORLD" 1John 2:2.

    To begin to understand "Atoning Sacrifice" we look at God's own instruction on the doctrine of the Atonement - in the "Day of Atonement" Lev 16. There we find that in vs 15 the "Sin offering" is slain. That is the "Atoning Sacrifice" - full and complete.

    But Lev 16 and the "Day of Atonement" does not end in vs 16.

    It continues with the work of Christ as our High Priest for the remainder of the chapter.

    And as Heb 8 and 9 tells us - the work of Christ as High Priest BEGINS when He goes to heaven after His resurrection.

    So when we today interact with Christ in accepting the Gospel and claiming forgiveness of sins - that benefit of atoning sacrifice - made on the cross is being applied to us as the work of Christ today - as our High Priest.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  3. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Bob,did you ever wonder why John wrote as he did here? To be in sympathy with your views he could have easily and simply said that "He is the atoning sacrifice for the sins of all the world."

    But no. John made a distinction or rather a clarification --as if to say not only is Jesus the true Messiah,the perfect Lamb of God for the Jews --but more amazingly,also for the scattered Gentile children of God scattered throughout the earth.
     
  4. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,023
    Likes Received:
    47
    the Bible states that Jesus died for the "many" also, that he is the High priest perfecting forever the "many" saved by Him, so is all all or many?
     
  5. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    The many in that case - is ALL - not one single person left out.

    In fact in 1John 2:2 "He is the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD"

    Not the watered down - down-sized "few" of Matt 7 that will be in heaven vs the "many" of Matt 7 that are lost.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  6. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,116
    Likes Received:
    206
    Get a concordance and you will find out that the term "all" is hardly ever used in scripture for every last man from Adam to the last one living. The anarthous construct conveys the idea of "all without distinction" not all without exception.
     
  7. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Not true at all that "ALL does not really mean ALL" when it is in conflict with the tradition of Calvinism.

    "ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" Romans 3

    "Death spread to ALL". Romans 5

    "I will draw ALL unto Me" John 12:32.

    "He came to His OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1

    And in 1John 2:2 the issue is not "ALL" but "WHOLE WORLD"

    In fact in 1John 2:2 "He is the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD"

    Not the watered down - down-sized "few" of Matt 7 that will be in heaven vs the "many" of Matt 7 that are lost.
     
  8. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    In fact in 1John 2:2 "He is the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD"

    Not the watered down - down-sized "few" of Matt 7 that will be in heaven vs the "many" of Matt 7 that are lost.

    To be in sympathy with my view he could just have written "He is the atoning sacrifice the sins of the WHOLE WORLD"

    obviously.

    But in the case John seems to go out of his way to take a swipe at Calvinism, as if he knew this would come up some day. So he says.

    1John 2:2 "He is the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD"

    And the "our" is not Jews in this case - it is all saved saint because John says of the wicked "They went out from us" - speaking of the church.

    John never uses "us" and "our" to mean "us Jews" in the book of 1John.

    in fact I know of no place where John ever refers to "us Jews" or "our Jewish faith" or any other such "I am Jew and not one of you" kind of language. Probably because he is writing so late in the first century.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  9. Iconoclast

    Iconoclast
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    13,378
    Likes Received:
    728
    :thumbsup::wavey:
     
  10. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,116
    Likes Received:
    206
    Your selection does not support your position on the use of the word "all." In regard to sin, Christ is excepted and thus not all without exception have sinned but only all who are fallen in Adam have sinned.

    In regard to John 12:32 the context is about inclusion of gentiles as the whole preceding context is about brining Gentiles to Christ and the term "all" is anarthous construct meaning "all" kinds or all without distinction to race, class or gender.

    In regard to 1 Jn. 2:2 the verse itself demonstrates a distinction between "our" versus "whole world" and thus a denial of racial priviledge or restriction to Jews alone. Hence, all races not merely the Jewish race.

    Matthew 7 is a very clear condemnation of your view and I wonder why you even use it? It refers to the very kind of gospel you preach and those who preach it.

    Try again!

     
  11. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not only do you already know this answer, you ask it every few months given what name you are going by (Jesusfan, DAChaser, etc.)

    Why not just interact with one of the many threads you have already started on it? Rippon can teach you the spiritual gift of thread resurrection :laugh:
     
  12. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    I like that line! Hey,Deacon just resurrected a seven year old thread.
     
  13. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Originally Posted by BobRyan [​IMG]
    Not true at all that "ALL does not really mean ALL" when it is in conflict with the tradition of Calvinism.

    "ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" Romans 3

    "Death spread to ALL". Romans 5

    "I will draw ALL unto Me" John 12:32.

    "He came to His OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1

    And in 1John 2:2 the issue is not "ALL" but "WHOLE WORLD"

    In fact in 1John 2:2 "He is the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD"

    Not the watered down - down-sized "few" of Matt 7 that will be in heaven vs the "many" of Matt 7 that are lost.



    Surely you can't be serious about watering down "God so Loved the WORLD that He gave" and "I will draw ALL unto ME" - by simply arguing that Christ is not a sinner and is not drawing himself to himself.

    Is that really all you have as proof that the ALL drawn are not all of fallen mankind "ALL have sinned" ...?

    It never occurred to me that you were so limited in possible options here.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     

Share This Page

Loading...