In JOhn 3:16 I don't. In 1 John 2:2, when you read it, you see that whatever Jesus did for us, he also did for the world. If that is pay for sin, then he paid for the sin of hte whole world. Yet he clearly did not do that. Some people still go to hell because of their sin. I have already explained that several times.
Typical fallacy ... The same words do not always mean the same thing. World can have several different meanings, including culture, universe, people, ungodly, etc.
Calvinistic "interpretation" is where it goes against the Greek lexicons. I have consulted Ardnt and Gingrich, Thayer, Parkhurst, Robinson, Abbot-Smith, Kittel, and ALL these authorities say that in both places "the human race" is meant. Are they all wrong?[/quote][/qb]I don't really disagree with them. I admit that 1 JOhn 2.2 can refer to the whole human race. Your trying to pick a fight with someone who doesn't really care that much. I lean towards my view, but only slightly. It is simply not a strong proof text for your position. As for the lexicons, if you actually look at them, you can see a variety of explanations. The verses assigned under each meaning is interpretation.
The only point is that the limited atonement view is not without merit in 1 John 2.2.
Why Do Some Reject While Others Receive Salvation?
Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by OldRegular, Apr 15, 2005.
Page 4 of 5
-
-
Larry, how can you say that Jesus "clearly did not do that", referring to His death on the cross for mankind? Are you yet so hard of understanding the Scriptures? Do you not see when Jesus says: "you shall dies in your sins, for if you believe not, that I am, you shall die in your sins" (John 8:24). And, Luke 13:3, etc, "I say to you, no, but, except you repent, you shall all likewise perish" It is because of mans REJECTION of what Jesus has done on the cross, that they shall be damned. Not because Jesus did not die for them.
Yes, alwsys to suit your own "interpretation"
Calvinistic "interpretation" is where it goes against the Greek lexicons. I have consulted Ardnt and Gingrich, Thayer, Parkhurst, Robinson, Abbot-Smith, Kittel, and ALL these authorities say that in both places "the human race" is meant. Are they all wrong?</font>[/QUOTE]I don't really disagree with them. I admit that 1 JOhn 2.2 can refer to the whole human race. Your trying to pick a fight with someone who doesn't really care that much. I lean towards my view, but only slightly. It is simply not a strong proof text for your position. As for the lexicons, if you actually look at them, you can see a variety of explanations. The verses assigned under each meaning is interpretation.
Yehm, whatever. You seem to me someone who is somewhat scared of the Truth, and cannt accept what the plain teaching of Scripture really is.
The only point is that the limited atonement view is not without merit in 1 John 2.2. [/QB][/QUOTE] -
Since the Atonement for sin, the only reason a person goes to hell is because of lack of faith, the sins are merely incidental to the lack of Faith, which is the actual cause of them going to hell. -
Look at how John uses the term "whole earth" in Revelation 13:3: And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. Does John mean that every individual in the world followed the beast (see v. 8)? And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. No? What, then, does he mean (see verse 7)? . . . all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
Likewise, we read in Revelation 12:9 that Satan deceives the whole world. Again, this clearly doesn't mean every individual in the world because two verses later we read that the saints of God have overcome Satan. Thus, whole world here must mean something like the world in general.
Now look at Romans 1:8. "First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world." Did everybody in the whole world, without exception, know the all the members of the church at Rome and did all people everywhere, without exception, talk about their faith? No? Then the term whole world must also have a meaning other than all people everywhere without exception.
Now look at what John wrote in John 11:51-52, "And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad."
Compare that to what John is saying in 1 John 2:2 (remember the same man wrote both of them and will use the same type of language to describe the same thing) "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."
John is saying that Jesus is the propitiation for our sins (that nation of Israel) but also for the sins of the whole world (the children of God that were scattered abroad).
Remember, no scripture is of private interpretation but must be compared with all other scriptures dealing with the same subject. When we compare scripture with scripture we see John using the same thought in both verses to describe propitiation not being just for the nation of Israel but for the children of God scattered all over the world. -
If you say it doesn't have to be forgiven you just have to quit sinning the sin of lack of faith, then are you saying that sin has no consequences? If a murderer quits murdering is he no longer guilty of the sin of murder and needs no forgiveness? If a child molester quits molesting children is he no longer guilty of child molestation and needs no forgiveness? If a whore-mongerer quits his whore-mongering does that mean he is no longer guilty of whore-mongering and needs no forgiveness?
Remember the bible says there is no more sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:26) so, if the sin of unbelief was not paid for on the cross it can never be paid for because God said there is no more sacrifice for sin.
And there you have the bankruptcy of the "general atonement" theory clearly demonstrated. -
Please format your posts correctly. -
-
The work of the Father you refer to in saying that lack of faith is a sin, is work that the father has already done! Believing and not believing are the only two conditions the human spirit can have when it departs the flesh and neither of those conditions is sin!
The condition of the spirit when separated from the flesh is the result of either righteousness or sin, not the righteousness or sin itself. -
He did that so that All the whosoever's, people like you and me could, through our faith in him, have everlasting life...Salvation! He did not atone for the sins of 20 out of 100 people, but for ALL SIN, be it sin of a believer or an unbeliever. He did that so NOTHING could prevent any man from having everlasting life through FAITH IN HIM!
Before you accuse me, NO, I DID NOT SAY HE IS SAVING ALL MANKIND! ONLY that all mankind can through faith in HIM be saved by him. The Salvation decision, "I've laid before you life and death -- Choose life", rests in the individual man! -
How do I lose?
God commands faith in Christ. Therefore, lack of faith in Christ is disobedience and that is sin. Howw in the world can you possibly deny that?
The bottom line is that Scripture contradicts you, and you won't accept that. -
-
No, I don't see what you mean? Your second sentence (the question) makes no sense.
The command to have faith in Christ is explicit in Scripture. Are you denying that? -
If as you say, the command is that we have faith, how is it that man is not capable of having faith in God until man is regenerated? That is a command that totally depraved man is not capable of obeying?
How can that which man is not capable of doing be sin? -
Because of what sin is ... Sin is any lack of conformity to God. Sin is not defined by ability, otherwise Psa 51.3 would be wrong. You have an improper definition of sin that ties it to ability, rather than a definition that ties it to the character of God.
-
Well guess what? If sin is as you define it, no Christian can ever have everlastinglife because no Christian can conform to God. Human's are simply NOT God and we cannot make ourselves OR BE MADE to conform to God! Adam, before he sinned did not conform to God! God made him man, a composit of spirit, soul, and body of flesh. God is spirit! There is no conformity of flesh that resembles spirit, nor can flesh conform to spirit! Flesh can however can be controlled by spirit, and indeed all human flesh is controlled by human spirit!
Sin is what we do . . . Not what we are! Faith is a condition of Spirit not something given to man, and it is FAITH that God seeks in man for man's salvation. -
You have brought up the great thing about biblical salvation, and the thing that causes me to question your orthodoxy. In biblical salvation, Christ has conformed to God for us. That is the whole point of Romans 5, and numerous other passages. I am righteous in Christ becasue Christ is my righteousness. I don't have to be. I can't be. If I could be righteous without Christ, then Christ died in vain (Gal 2).
-
I started this discussion topic on April 15 because I wanted to get some idea of how those who believe man, not God, is Sovereign in Salvation explain why some reject while others receive salvation. So far not one of these people has provided an answer. All they have done is dump on those who believe that Salvation from beginning to the end, from election to glorification, is the work of the Sovereign God.
-
It appears your motivation for posting this topic was either misguided or faulty. I don't know a single man who thinks or says that Man, rather than God, is sovereign.
The "dumping on" you speak of is those of us who know better attempting to correct the understandings of those who use scripture out of context and make it mean what it does not while in context. -
Larry,
Any righteousness you perceive you have is the result of your faith in God and nothing more, Just like Abraham! -
I gather from all that you have posted that the final decision regarding your salvation was yours, not God's. Whether you admit it or not you are making yourself sovereign in salvation rather than God.
Page 4 of 5