TULI doctrines not found in scripture

Limited Atonement: John 3:16, 10:11, 10:15, Romans 5:12-19

Calvinism falsely claims Christ's death on the cross reconciled the elect and did not provide reconciliation for all mankind. The Biblical doctrine teaches that (1) Christ provided reconciliation for all mankind, and (2) only those who "receive" the reconciliation are actually reconcilied.

John 3:16 says God so loved the world. Now John uses the word translated "world" in only two ways, to refer to fallen mankind, and to refer to the corrupt system of fallen mankind. In John 3:16 John's inspired word is saying "for God so loved fallen mankind...." Therefore the verse supports Christ died for all mankind.

John 10:11 says Jesus lays down His life for "the sheep." Does the verse define "the sheep" as individuals elected before creation? Nope. So that meaning is simply poured into the verse.

John 10:15 again says Jesus lays down His life for "the sheep" leaving "the sheep" meaning undefined. I can say the sheep refers to all mankind, and support the assumption from 1 John 2:2.

Romans 5:12-19 actually supports unlimited reconciliation, "even so, through the one act of righteousness, [Christ's sacrifice] there resulted justification of life to all men." This does not say all men received the justification, but rather Christ's sacrifice provided the opportunity of justification to all men. But only those who receive the reconciliation, receive the justification.

 

Calvinism plays word games to avoid the obvious. Did Christ die for all mankind? Calvinism says no. The Bible says yes. So rather than admit the obvious, they play games with sufficient and efficient.

John 3:16 says God so loved the world, not foreseen believers in the world. Anyone can rewrite the text so it says what their manmade doctrine asserts. But if we look at it objectively God so loved the world, fallen mankind, that He gave His one of a kind Son so that whoever believes in Him, from out of the world, would not perish but have eternal life. The verse places no limit on who can believe, or who God loved. None, zip, nada.

Is sheep alway used for the elect? They all like sheep have gone astray does not refer to the elect, but to fallen mankind.

If sheep only referred to the elect, why would qualifiers like "of My sheep" and my sheep, and not of my sheep be found.

1 John 2:2 says Christ became the propitiation for the whole world, and therefore supports Christ died for mankind, not just the elect, and therefore when scripture says Christ laid down His life for "the sheep" logical necessity requires "the sheep" to be the whole world.

Next, the logical absurdity is put forth that the absense of support supports the assertion because this verses do not rule it out. I kid you not, that was the argument.

Lots of verses rule out limited atonement. 1 John 2:2 for one. Then the one that says, Christ laid down His life as a ransom for all, etc, etc. I was dealing with the verses that supposedly support the false doctrine and demonstrated they provide no actual support.

Next we have the falsehood plainly put forth that "according to the purpose of His will" means unconditional election. This again is simply pouring the doctrine into scripture. The purpose of His will could be conditional election. We must stick with what scripture says, not what is unsaid, and supplied by man-made doctrine.

 

Irresistible Grace: John 6:44, 10:4, 10:27; Ephesians 2:4-9

Lets finish this off with a look at the so-called support for the false doctrine of irresistible grace.

No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me, draws Him, and I will raise Him up on the last day. What Calvinism does to this verse is to say it says "I will raise up on the last day those the Father draws. Thus to be drawn is to be saved forever. Total fiction, and yet another example of pouring man-made doctrine into scripture. What the verse actually says is a person cannot come to Jesus, unless drawn, and those that come to Jesus after they have been drawn, a second conditional, I will raise up.

If we look at verse 45, we see that everyone who has (1) heard and (2) learned from the Father comes to Me. Does "drawing" equate with "learning?" No. If we are drawn, something or some one is influencing us, we are being acted upon, but learning is internal, something we are doing in response to something external. Therefore being drawn equates with hearing the gospel of Christ and learning equates with believing and trusting in the message of the gospel, which is to say, believing in Christ.

In summary, John 6:44-45 provides no support for the doctrine of irresistible grace when contextually considered.

John 10:4 and 10:27 also provide no support. These verse refers to people who have been saved, who have entered through the "door of Christ" and are spiritually "in Christ" e.g are Christ's sheep, those that belong to Christ. What Calvinism does is say people (the elect) became "Christ's sheep" before creation. So yet another fiction supported by a fiction. All this verse actually supports is that once a person becomes "My sheep" they hear Christ's voice and follow Him. But it provides no support for the underlying premise, that people are "My sheep" before they enter through the door, before God credits their faith in Christ as righteousness and spiritually places them in Christ. The kindest thing that can be said is using this verse is an example of circular reasoning.

Ephesians 2:4-9 again is addressing born again individuals. saying there were made alive together with Christ, saved by grace when God spiritually placed them in Christ. The passage says that our salvation was not of ourselves, it was a gift of God. It does not say our faith in Christ was compelled by irresistible grace. The so called "gift of faith" is yet another fiction (irresistible grace by another name) and no support whatsoever is found in this passage.

In summary, like the other false doctrines, this on has no actual support in scripture, but is supported by taking ambiguous passages and pouring the doctrine into the passage. But this one (using Ephesians 2:8-9) to support the gift of faith is so flagrant a foul that even Dr. D. Wallace says it should not be used to support the doctrine. Who knew?

 

Providing propitiation for everyone doesn't equate into universalism if God puts a condition or a provision on it.

Christ becoming our propitiation, but not only for us, but for the whole world, provides the opportunity for salvation to all mankind. But only when God credits a person's faith as righteousness and spiritually places them in Christ, does the person receive the benefits of Christ's provision.

So in a sense, Christ died for all, and Christ died for the church. It is not either/or, it is both, He provides the means of salvation for all, and provides salvation for those God gives to Him after crediting their faith in Christ as righteousness.