Featured What is the Atonement?

Asking that question does not address what I said. It makes it available but does not impose it.

See Romans 6:23 says salvation is a free gift. Gifts must be recognized, accepted and received by the recipient. Gifts are never imposed upon . they are never forced on the recipient.

Now that is my position based on scripture. You have not addressed your question begging.

 

So that's what it means to be stuck on stup........ahh he still won't get it.

 

I never submitted the word force. The gifts and callings of God are w/o repentance...

 

Ok I will reword it. Gifts are given with the option to reject them as God has done with salvation.

You lost me here. I have no idea why you think this has anything to do with what we are talking about.

 

The gifts and callings of God are w/o repentance...iow, you can't turn away from them...

You said gifts of God can be refused. That's not what the bible states. His gifts are w/o repentance...

 

That is not what w/o repentance means. In fact that is the very first time I have ever heard anyone make that claim. It means God will never revoke them not that man will not reject them. Of course the election in Romans 11 is refering to the national election of Israel and not individual election of the saints.

 

Yeah, Rev, didn't you remember that if you disagree with the reformed position you are nothing more than a heretic? :BangHead:

 

29 for unrepented of [are] the gifts and the calling of God;(YLT)
29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.(NASB)
29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.(NIV)
29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.(ESV)
29 since God’s gracious gifts and calling are irrevocable.[a](HCSB) [a]Or not taken back
29 God’s gifts and God’s call are under full warranty—never canceled, never rescinded.(MSG)
29 For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.(NAB)
29 And the gifts and the calling of God be without repenting. [Soothly the gifts and calling of God be without repenting.](WYC)
29 For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.(RSV)


The gifts of God are irrevocable. It's like our natural birth, we had zero ability to assist our mommy when she birthed us. God doesn't need our assistance, either.

Now in regards to the atonement, it actually brought reconciliation. If it was universal...the atonement...so is the reconciliation. There's no assurety in the universal atonement view, just potentiality. Everyone could potentially be saved, everyone could potentially die lost. Christ did his part in dying for all mankind, now all mankind must do their part. Unless they do their part, they'll die lost. To those who die(d) the lost, Christ was a life jacket that wouldn't float.

 

You are right.

 

Says who?.........

 

It might help you to realize that there are other views between your extreme and that of pelagianism -- which you obviously misunderstand -- and that these other views have been held far longer. You might want to study the Anabaptists and the Eastern Orthodox Church.

 

What I know from this board and from how Caner has been treated is that if you oppose calvinists they must destroy you. They will come after you with both barrels and unload it all on you. You must not be left standing and once you are down they will unload another barrel at you. They are unrelenting and fearful of any opposing views.

 

Rev Mitchel,

Convicted1 is correct in stating the atonement did bring actual reconciliation not merely make it possible. Says who you ask? Scripture,
"21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 In the body of his flesh through death" (Colossians 1:21 and 22(a)) Also, "10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." (Romans 5:10)

This is why the atonement could not apply to every human being who ever lived, but only the elect.

 

What a bunch of foolishness you spout.

Sure Caner is an ardent anti-Calvinist, but what Calvinists and non-Calvinists alike have been concerned with was his lie-saturated "ministry",racism,arrogance etc.

I have devoted threads regarding non-Calvinist preachers of the past and present that I have appreciated. Adrian Rogers was certainly anti-Calvinist in his preaching --did we go after him with "both barrels" blazing? Of course not.The same applies to Charles Stanley, Chuck Smith, Wilkerson, Kendall and McGee. You have lost any semblance of perspective RM.

 

I wonder why the early Christians, who had the same scripture you have, didn't see your views taught there.