yes, we all hold that a sinner must receive jesus by faith to get saved, but the fact that he can even do that would be the result of Gods election of/towards Him!
I do believe that Salvation is ALL Grace and is 100% of the Lord.
But if limited atonement is true--that would make Christ's Power look weak and limited--which we know is NOT true.
God's desire and purpose and will was always that ALL men be saved--Men like to use that word all and say that it just means some--well I agree in the fact that God chooses some men in this generation and some in the next and so on--But ALL was lost in the fall through Adam,and God placed all under sin through adam.
Christ came to seek and save THAT(all mankind that was lost through adam)which was lost,He never said he would bring them in all at the same time(there is still Judgement)but he did say that ALL men would be drawn unto his self if he be lifted up.And God's word does not go out and fail in what it purposes to do according to his will :love2::love2::love2:
Tom...please allow me to be frank with you. I am sincerely confused by the remarks I read in some of your posts. To me anyway you appear to show distain for DoG & the systematic theology that goes with it. Anyone could throw rocks at it...heck I have had heated arguements over it myself...but there are core principles we as DoG believers hold dear...and we will contest that we find them in scriptures.
Others here might read into your last post that you have sitcking point with Particular Atonement & with some coaching you will see your way through...I don't know though. See I'm not sure that your not looking forsomething youwant trouser to keep you where you are.
So please help me to understand your true motives.,id need to know that before entering into serious dialog with you.
I understand, for when I moved from being an Evangelical Arminian to a calvinist, was stuck on 4 points, with limited atonement sticking me!
Now realise I misunderstood that view, for I thought mrant that death of Christ was limited to how effective it was to save, bu actually, means that the effect to save was intended for just the Elect of God, that He did not die to atone for the sins of those who were to remain in their sins .
IF Jesus really died for ALL men, as many hold here, that would mean either univeralism, or else jesus death purchased a potential salvation only, and up to us in the end to get saved or not!
Arminianism like Calvinism are identical in McMahon's description according to history.
I've found that most of those who would reform the RCC are so much like it them selves they don't have any idea on what to reform. In fact most have forgotten that it was the Catholic faith they originally wanted to reform. They ended up reforming them selves in to something other than true Calvinism or Augustinianism which they originally clung to. Giving up infant baptism and inherited election. Wavering in the wind like a reed from one doctrine to another. Well at least Calvin said there is no Salvation apart from the Holy Roman Church. Therefore it is no surprise that Calvinist today are flocking back into the old RCC
MB
Well is this forum is any indication, its the Baptists converting to Catholicism, not the Calvinists. Personally I think their farther removed that anyone can be (referring to Baptists holding to DoG)