Just how LIMITED is the ATONEMENT?

Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. (NASB: Lockman)

Greek: mia gar prosphora teteleioken (3SRAI) eis to dienekes tous agiazomenous. (PPPMPA)

Amplified: For by a single offering He has forever completely cleansed and perfected those who are consecrated and made holy. (Amplified Bible - Lockman)

Barclay: For by one offering and for all time he perfectly gave us that cleansing we need to enter into the presence of God. (Westminster Press)

NLT: For by that one offering he perfected forever all those whom he is making holy. (NLT - Tyndale House)

Phillips: For by virtue of that one offering he has perfected for all time every one whom he makes holy. (Phillips: Touchstone)

Wuest: for by one offering He has brought to completion forever those who are set apart for God and His service. (Eerdmans)

Young's Literal: for by one offering he hath perfected to the end those sanctified;

 

Verse 14. For by one offering
His death upon the cross.

He hath perfected for ever.
He has procured remission of sins and holiness; fur it is well observed here, and in several parts of this epistle, that τελειοω, to make perfect, is the same as αφεσιναμαÏτιωνποιεω, to procure remission of sins.

Them that are sanctified.
τουςαγιαζομενους. Them that have received the sprinkling of the blood of this offering. These, therefore, receiving redemption through that blood, have no need of any other offering; as this was a complete atonement, purification, and title to eternal glory.

Adam Clark

 

If the payment is limited to the elect only, then God must refuse those who come to Him whose sins He did not pay for.

 

All the work is done what is left is to enter His rest, enter Jesus Christ.

 

Except there won't be any of those folks who come to Him. There will be none to refuse.

 

But of course, an "invisible Calvninist source" that is "notable" (why would it be otherwise?) that bolsters you and proves what you've said is true and accurate. Nothing tangible there at all. I think it is in sync with your out of context quotes.

I apologize that bothers you, but guess what, this is a debate forum, and these things happen. I totally disagree with what you use as proof, and see it as inaccurate and ripped from a more broad context.

Your quotes are contextually inaccurate, and I've given you the reason why I say this. Did you miss that part? I know you saw it. It surrounds the given meaning to "all."

Recant? What is this an inquisition? I'm recanting nothing as there is nothing to recant. What is this nonsense, someone disagrees with your out of context quotes, shares why they disagree, and now have to recant? Not here.

I'm not the only one to suggest "context" surrounding your quotes. They're accurate, IF taken in context, which when quoted by you, are not in context, accept within the lens you want them viewed from.

 

Exactly. Jesus said of those who come, He will for no reason cast them out. For NO reason whatsoever.

:thumbsup:

 

I am sure that there is some element of understanding I am lacking, which is often the case.

Everyone who comes is welcomed, everyone can come, but many will not come because they can't come.

 

No no no. They can come, but they don't want to come because God did not put the thing(?) in them that makes them want to come, so they won't come. Got it?

 

IF I accepted Calvinism, I would be baptizing infants and building a state church and other such viewpoints held by John Calvin. This is true of Hodge, who was not a Baptist.

So, when Baptists speak of Calvinism, we generally refer to the five points opposing Arminianism at that time. These points were made after Calvin's death.

Also, Calvin changed his viewpoints on many doctrines between writing his first book (Institutes) and his book on Romans. It is also important to remember that men like Calvin and Luther were influenced by the Church of Rome and such documents. Baptists were independent, whether they were called Baptists or not. They too had some "funny" doctrines included in their works.

The basic doctrine of "Calvinism" is the absolute sovereignty of God, and everything must fit into that leading doctrine. Hence, we have the so-called free will of man listed under the Permissive Will of God, as a subsection of absolute sovereignty. This is where God says, "This far and no further."

Cheers,

Jim

 

Thank you for your kind and gracious words.

I appreciate a good irenic discussion. The vitriol that often accompanies the topic at hand grieves me. Most people would never even consider saying these things face to face. It's easy to hide behind the supposed anonymity of a discussion board. Trust me. I've been known to type out a quick zinger every now and then. All of us need to keep in mind this biblical admonition:

James 1:19-20 19 This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; 20 for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God.

 

Hodge is right in the quote you provide.

What is your point?

 

No, it's been personal for a long time with you. You know that's the truth too.

I say put up or hush up back back at you.

I've already given you my reason, yet you continue to ask for it. It must mean my reason hit the right target. Yes. That is it.

Nothing personal though. OK?

I simply, as Luke2427 see your thread and purpose of it as missing some big point altogether. Are you blowing smoke again?

 

I don't see anything "personal" here, rather a request to defend ones position. In fact I see in the closing lines the polar opposite.

"It doesn't have to become personal. We are all friends here."

 

Sounds like interpretations alright. An interpretation is the ideas men came to on their own. Biblical truth on the other hand is not interpreted. It is given by God.
MB

 

I am on a cell phone, so I cannot copy and paste, but for a very informative article on the unlimited/limited atonement debate please Google;

The Case for Unlimited Atonement (by Ron Rhodes)

You can copy that title and paste it in Google to find the article.

Mr. Rhodes identifies himself as a 4-point Calvinist, and provides MANY quotes from Calvinist and Reformed theologians who support Unlimited Atonement. In fairness he also provides quotes of theologians who support Limited Atonement.

Skandelon is correct, Calvin made many quotes supporting Unlimited Atonement which are shown in this article as well as Luther, Augustine and many early church fathers. In fact, this author shows that the vast majority of theologians before the Reformation held to Unlimited Atonement.

Perhaps someone can copy and paste this article here, it is very well written and informative.