A question just to start things off.
- Thread starter Administrator
- Start date
civic
Well-known member
Lets look at augustine who was calvins mentor @Arial
I understand where calvinism originates from as I know my church history.
Augustine himself. (A wonderful saint! As full of pride, passion, bitternesscensoriousness, and as foul-mouthed to all that contradicted him… When Augustine’s passions were heated, his word is not worth a rush. And here is the secret: St. Augustine was angry at Pelagius: Hence he slandered and abused him, (as his manner was,) without either fear or shame. And St. Augustine was then in the Christian world, what Aristotle was afterwards: There needed no other proof of any assertion, than Ipse dixit: “St. Augustine said it.” ‘
– John Wesley, The Works of the Late Reverend John Wesley (1835 Edition), volume 2, p. 110
This man was Calvin’s mentor whom he quoted 100’s of times in his works and where most of his doctrines originated from .
and sola scripture no more !
And thus a man who is resting upon faith, hope and love, and who keeps a firm hold upon these, does not need the Scriptures except for the purpose of instructing others. Accordingly, many live without copies of the Scriptures, even in solitude, on the strength of these three graces [here Augustine seems to refer to hermits like St Antony of Egypt] . So that in their case, I think, the saying is already fulfilled: “Whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.” 1 Corinthians 13:8 Yet by means of these instruments (as they may be called), so great an edifice of faith and love has been built up in them, that, holding to what is perfect, they do not seek for what is only in part perfect— of course, I mean, so far as is possible in this life; for, in comparison with the future life, the life of no just and holy man is perfect here. Therefore the apostle says: “Now abides faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity:” 1 Corinthians 13:13 because, when a man shall have reached the eternal world, while the other two graces will fail, love will remain greater and more assured.” Saint Augustine’s De doctrina Christiana : Chapter 39.— He Who is Mature in Faith, Hope and Love, Needs Scripture No Longer.
“Except for the purpose of procreation, another man would have been a more suitable companion/or Adam or if it was not for help in producing children that a wife was made for the man, then what other help was she made for? If it was to till the earth together with him there was as yet no hard toil to need such assistance; and if there had been the need, a male would have made a better help. The same can be said about companionship, should he grow tired of solitude. How much more agreeably, after all, for conviviality and conversation would two male friends live together on equal terms than man and wife? While if it was expedient that one should be in charge and the other should comply to avoid a clash of wills disturbing the peace of the household, such an arrangement would have been ensured by one being made first, the other later, especially if the later were created from the former, as the female was in fact created. Or would anyone say that God was only able to make a female from the man’s rib, and not also a male if he so wished? For these reasons I cannot work out what help a wife could have been made to provide the man with, if you take away the purpose of childbearing.”
— Augustine, On Genesis, Book IX, 5.9, p. 380.
augustine views ‘god’ as an IT, a thing related to the mind and reason… compare plotinus’ three hypostases of which the pagan ‘one’ is a substance called ‘mind’.
AUGUSTINE: What if we could find something that you were certain not only exists, but is more excellent than our
reason? Would you hesitate to say that this thing, whatever it is, is God? “(of free choice of the will, p. 40)
plato's pagan 'god' is the same as augustine’s.
book 5, de trinitate, augustine’s pagan 'god' is an aristotelian substance, a thing:
“3. He is, however, without doubt, a substance, or, if it be better so to call it, an essence, which the Greeks call οὐσία .”
(many quotes for plato, plotinus, aristotle and augustine available… they share the same anti christian theology.)
from @eve :
It's astounding that Augustine over and over (I have the quotes)
defines his 'god' explicitly as a platonic form or aristotelian substance.
and we know how ugly that substance is from aquinas' satanic summa...
which he wrote in response to the islamicist averroes, and whose
questions, concerns, method of 'reading' scripture were all pagan questions and
method. Aristotle's logic and theories are all describing the exact
same type of 'unmoved mover' that is completely satanic and pagan.
Plotinus is where augustine got his plato...and plotinus' text
follows the exact same belief system... where 'god' has
3 hypostases as the 'One' and one of these is reason or intellect.
Augustine is where Descartes got his horrible monad "I think".. like augustine
he even wondered if it (the "I" that thinks) was God (cf. meditations.)
and it is where Kant got his version of 'god' as transcendental apperception.
All of these were practicing occult sorceries: Descartes, Newton, Kant.
Descartes got his 'method' from dreams and was a big augustinian.
Um. Not from God.
augustine in his meditations admits that what brought him to be
open to christianity was that it allowed a merge of mind and intellect
to the scriptures..he was taken with the bishops way of weaving
greek theology into his sermons... augustine did not give up the greek
theology, but glued it to Christianity and then he proceeded
to oversee books, canons and other details. To be sure that no one
would ever understand scripture. eve
The Apple doesn't fall far from the Tree .
Calvin on the RCC :
"the Roman Catholic church was the Mother church; that no-one had the right to withdraw from the Mother church even if it were sinful; and that there was no salvation outside the walls of the Mother church. "(Book 4, Institutes, Calvin)
Augustine on the RCC :
While the popularity of the specific expression “Mother of the Church” has grown in recent centuries, the theological roots of this title for Mary go back to the early Church.
The Fathers of the Church often spoke of Mary as the New Eve. Just as the Woman Eve was “the mother of all the living” (Gen 3:20), the Woman Mary was mother of all those living in Christ. In Revelation 12:17, St. John says that this Woman’s offspring are “those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus.”
St. Augustine and St. Leo the Great also both reflected on the Virgin Mary’s importance in the mystery of Christ.
“In fact the former (St. Augustine) says that Mary is the mother of the members of Christ, because with charity she cooperated in the rebirth of the faithful into the Church, while the latter (St. Leo the Great) says that the birth of the Head is also the birth of the body, thus indicating that Mary is at once Mother of Christ, the Son of God, and mother of the members of his Mystical Body, which is the Church,” Pope Francis’ 2018 decree noted. It said these reflections are a result of the “divine motherhood of Mary and from her intimate union in the work of the Redeemer.” https://catholicnewsherald.com/183-news/faith/faith-may/7108-mary-mother-of-the-church
conclusion: we know that calvin was a student of augustine and quoted him more than 700 times in his writings and over 200 times in his institutes. Augustine was a Manichaeism/ Gnostic
I understand where calvinism originates from as I know my church history.
Augustine himself. (A wonderful saint! As full of pride, passion, bitternesscensoriousness, and as foul-mouthed to all that contradicted him… When Augustine’s passions were heated, his word is not worth a rush. And here is the secret: St. Augustine was angry at Pelagius: Hence he slandered and abused him, (as his manner was,) without either fear or shame. And St. Augustine was then in the Christian world, what Aristotle was afterwards: There needed no other proof of any assertion, than Ipse dixit: “St. Augustine said it.” ‘
– John Wesley, The Works of the Late Reverend John Wesley (1835 Edition), volume 2, p. 110
This man was Calvin’s mentor whom he quoted 100’s of times in his works and where most of his doctrines originated from .
and sola scripture no more !
And thus a man who is resting upon faith, hope and love, and who keeps a firm hold upon these, does not need the Scriptures except for the purpose of instructing others. Accordingly, many live without copies of the Scriptures, even in solitude, on the strength of these three graces [here Augustine seems to refer to hermits like St Antony of Egypt] . So that in their case, I think, the saying is already fulfilled: “Whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.” 1 Corinthians 13:8 Yet by means of these instruments (as they may be called), so great an edifice of faith and love has been built up in them, that, holding to what is perfect, they do not seek for what is only in part perfect— of course, I mean, so far as is possible in this life; for, in comparison with the future life, the life of no just and holy man is perfect here. Therefore the apostle says: “Now abides faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity:” 1 Corinthians 13:13 because, when a man shall have reached the eternal world, while the other two graces will fail, love will remain greater and more assured.” Saint Augustine’s De doctrina Christiana : Chapter 39.— He Who is Mature in Faith, Hope and Love, Needs Scripture No Longer.
“Except for the purpose of procreation, another man would have been a more suitable companion/or Adam or if it was not for help in producing children that a wife was made for the man, then what other help was she made for? If it was to till the earth together with him there was as yet no hard toil to need such assistance; and if there had been the need, a male would have made a better help. The same can be said about companionship, should he grow tired of solitude. How much more agreeably, after all, for conviviality and conversation would two male friends live together on equal terms than man and wife? While if it was expedient that one should be in charge and the other should comply to avoid a clash of wills disturbing the peace of the household, such an arrangement would have been ensured by one being made first, the other later, especially if the later were created from the former, as the female was in fact created. Or would anyone say that God was only able to make a female from the man’s rib, and not also a male if he so wished? For these reasons I cannot work out what help a wife could have been made to provide the man with, if you take away the purpose of childbearing.”
— Augustine, On Genesis, Book IX, 5.9, p. 380.
augustine views ‘god’ as an IT, a thing related to the mind and reason… compare plotinus’ three hypostases of which the pagan ‘one’ is a substance called ‘mind’.
AUGUSTINE: What if we could find something that you were certain not only exists, but is more excellent than our
reason? Would you hesitate to say that this thing, whatever it is, is God? “(of free choice of the will, p. 40)
plato's pagan 'god' is the same as augustine’s.
book 5, de trinitate, augustine’s pagan 'god' is an aristotelian substance, a thing:
“3. He is, however, without doubt, a substance, or, if it be better so to call it, an essence, which the Greeks call οὐσία .”
(many quotes for plato, plotinus, aristotle and augustine available… they share the same anti christian theology.)
from @eve :
It's astounding that Augustine over and over (I have the quotes)
defines his 'god' explicitly as a platonic form or aristotelian substance.
and we know how ugly that substance is from aquinas' satanic summa...
which he wrote in response to the islamicist averroes, and whose
questions, concerns, method of 'reading' scripture were all pagan questions and
method. Aristotle's logic and theories are all describing the exact
same type of 'unmoved mover' that is completely satanic and pagan.
Plotinus is where augustine got his plato...and plotinus' text
follows the exact same belief system... where 'god' has
3 hypostases as the 'One' and one of these is reason or intellect.
Augustine is where Descartes got his horrible monad "I think".. like augustine
he even wondered if it (the "I" that thinks) was God (cf. meditations.)
and it is where Kant got his version of 'god' as transcendental apperception.
All of these were practicing occult sorceries: Descartes, Newton, Kant.
Descartes got his 'method' from dreams and was a big augustinian.
Um. Not from God.
augustine in his meditations admits that what brought him to be
open to christianity was that it allowed a merge of mind and intellect
to the scriptures..he was taken with the bishops way of weaving
greek theology into his sermons... augustine did not give up the greek
theology, but glued it to Christianity and then he proceeded
to oversee books, canons and other details. To be sure that no one
would ever understand scripture. eve
The Apple doesn't fall far from the Tree .
Calvin on the RCC :
"the Roman Catholic church was the Mother church; that no-one had the right to withdraw from the Mother church even if it were sinful; and that there was no salvation outside the walls of the Mother church. "(Book 4, Institutes, Calvin)
Augustine on the RCC :
While the popularity of the specific expression “Mother of the Church” has grown in recent centuries, the theological roots of this title for Mary go back to the early Church.
The Fathers of the Church often spoke of Mary as the New Eve. Just as the Woman Eve was “the mother of all the living” (Gen 3:20), the Woman Mary was mother of all those living in Christ. In Revelation 12:17, St. John says that this Woman’s offspring are “those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus.”
St. Augustine and St. Leo the Great also both reflected on the Virgin Mary’s importance in the mystery of Christ.
“In fact the former (St. Augustine) says that Mary is the mother of the members of Christ, because with charity she cooperated in the rebirth of the faithful into the Church, while the latter (St. Leo the Great) says that the birth of the Head is also the birth of the body, thus indicating that Mary is at once Mother of Christ, the Son of God, and mother of the members of his Mystical Body, which is the Church,” Pope Francis’ 2018 decree noted. It said these reflections are a result of the “divine motherhood of Mary and from her intimate union in the work of the Redeemer.” https://catholicnewsherald.com/183-news/faith/faith-may/7108-mary-mother-of-the-church
conclusion: we know that calvin was a student of augustine and quoted him more than 700 times in his writings and over 200 times in his institutes. Augustine was a Manichaeism/ Gnostic
Last edited:
civic
Well-known member
continued from above on augustine/calvin
THERE IS NO QUESTION that Calvin imposed upon the Bible certain erroneous interpretations from his Roman Catholic background. Many leading Calvinists agree that the writings of Augustine were the actual source of most of what is known as Calvinism today. Calvinists David Steele and Curtis Thomas point out that “The basic doctrines of the Calvinistic position had been vigorously defended by Augustine against Pelagius during the fifth century.”1
In his eye-opening book, The Other Side of Calvinism, Laurence M. Vance thoroughly documents that “John Calvin did not originate the doctrines that bear his name....”2 Vance quotes numerous well-known Calvinists to this effect. For example, Kenneth G. Talbot and W. Gary Crampton write, “The system of doctrine which bears the name of John Calvin was in no way originated by him....”3 B. B. Warfield declared, “The system of doctrine taught by Calvin is just the Augustinianism common to the whole body of the Reformers.”4 Thus the debt that the creeds coming out of the Reformation owe to Augustine is also acknowledged. This is not surprising in view of the fact that most of the Reformers had been part of the Roman Catholic Church, of which Augustine was one of the most highly regarded “saints.” John Piper acknowledges that Augustine was the major influence upon both Calvin and Luther, who continued to revere him and his doctrines even after they broke away from Roman Catholicism.5
C. H. Spurgeon admitted that “perhaps Calvin himself derived it [Calvinism] mainly from the writings of Augustine.”6 Alvin L. Baker wrote, “There is hardly a doctrine of Calvin that does not bear the marks of Augustine’s influence.”7 For example, the following from Augustine sounds like an echo reverberating through the writings of Calvin:
Even as he has appointed them to be regenerated...whom he predestinated to everlasting life, as the most merciful bestower of grace, whilst to those whom he has predestinated to eternal death, he is also the most righteous awarder of punishment.8
C. Gregg Singer said, “The main features of Calvin’s theology are found in the writings of St. Augustine to such an extent that many theologians regard Calvinism as a more fully developed form of Augustinianism.”9 Such statements are staggering declarations in view of the undisputed fact that, as Vance points out, the Roman Catholic Church itself has a better claim on Augustine than do the Calvinists.10 Calvin himself said:
Augustine is so wholly with me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all fulness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings.11
Augustine and the Use of Force
The fourth century Donatists believed that the church should be a pure communion of true believers who demonstrated the truth of the gospel in their lives. They abhorred the apostasy that had come into the church when Constantine wedded Christianity to paganism in order to unify the empire. Compromising clergy were “evil priests working hand in glove with the kings of the earth, who show that they have no king but Caesar.” To the Donatists, the church was a “small body of saved surrounded by the unregenerate mass.”12 This is, of course, the biblical view.
Augustine, on the other hand, saw the church of his day as a mixture of believers and unbelievers, in which purity and evil should be allowed to exist side by side for the sake of unity. He used the power of the state to compel church attendance (as Calvin also would 1,200 years later): “Whoever was not found within the Church was not asked the reason, but was to be corrected and converted....”13 Calvin followed his mentor Augustine in enforcing church attendance and participation in the sacraments by threats (and worse) against the citizens of Geneva. Augustine “identified the Donatists as heretics...who could be subjected to imperial legislation [and force] in exactly the same way as other criminals and misbelievers, including poisoners and pagans.”14 Frend says of Augustine, “The questing, sensitive youth had become the father of the inquisition.”15
Though he preferred persuasion if possible, Augustine supported military force against those who were rebaptized as believers after conversion to Christ and for other alleged heretics. In his controversy with the Donatists, using a distorted and un-Christian interpretation of Luke:14:23
,16 Augustine declared:
Why therefore should not the Church use force in compelling her lost sons to return?... The Lord Himself said, “Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in....” Wherefore is the power which the Church has received...through the religious character and faith of kings...the instrument by which those who are found in the highways and hedges—that is, in heresies and schisms—are compelled to come in, and let them not find fault with being compelled.17
Sadly, Calvin put into effect in Geneva the very principles of punishment, coercion, and death that Augustine advocated and that the Roman Catholic Church followed consistently for centuries. Henry H. Milman writes: “Augustinianism was worked up into a still more rigid and uncompromising system by the severe intellect of Calvin.”18 And he justified himself by Augustine’s erroneous interpretation of Luke:14:23
. How could any who today hail Calvin as a great exegete accept such abuse of this passage?
Compel? Isn’t that God’s job through Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace? Compel those for whom Christ didn’t die and whom God has predestined to eternal torment? This verse refutes Calvinism no matter how it is intepreted!https://www.thebereancall.org/content/july-2012-classic
hope this helps !!!
THERE IS NO QUESTION that Calvin imposed upon the Bible certain erroneous interpretations from his Roman Catholic background. Many leading Calvinists agree that the writings of Augustine were the actual source of most of what is known as Calvinism today. Calvinists David Steele and Curtis Thomas point out that “The basic doctrines of the Calvinistic position had been vigorously defended by Augustine against Pelagius during the fifth century.”1
In his eye-opening book, The Other Side of Calvinism, Laurence M. Vance thoroughly documents that “John Calvin did not originate the doctrines that bear his name....”2 Vance quotes numerous well-known Calvinists to this effect. For example, Kenneth G. Talbot and W. Gary Crampton write, “The system of doctrine which bears the name of John Calvin was in no way originated by him....”3 B. B. Warfield declared, “The system of doctrine taught by Calvin is just the Augustinianism common to the whole body of the Reformers.”4 Thus the debt that the creeds coming out of the Reformation owe to Augustine is also acknowledged. This is not surprising in view of the fact that most of the Reformers had been part of the Roman Catholic Church, of which Augustine was one of the most highly regarded “saints.” John Piper acknowledges that Augustine was the major influence upon both Calvin and Luther, who continued to revere him and his doctrines even after they broke away from Roman Catholicism.5
C. H. Spurgeon admitted that “perhaps Calvin himself derived it [Calvinism] mainly from the writings of Augustine.”6 Alvin L. Baker wrote, “There is hardly a doctrine of Calvin that does not bear the marks of Augustine’s influence.”7 For example, the following from Augustine sounds like an echo reverberating through the writings of Calvin:
Even as he has appointed them to be regenerated...whom he predestinated to everlasting life, as the most merciful bestower of grace, whilst to those whom he has predestinated to eternal death, he is also the most righteous awarder of punishment.8
C. Gregg Singer said, “The main features of Calvin’s theology are found in the writings of St. Augustine to such an extent that many theologians regard Calvinism as a more fully developed form of Augustinianism.”9 Such statements are staggering declarations in view of the undisputed fact that, as Vance points out, the Roman Catholic Church itself has a better claim on Augustine than do the Calvinists.10 Calvin himself said:
Augustine is so wholly with me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all fulness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings.11
Augustine and the Use of Force
The fourth century Donatists believed that the church should be a pure communion of true believers who demonstrated the truth of the gospel in their lives. They abhorred the apostasy that had come into the church when Constantine wedded Christianity to paganism in order to unify the empire. Compromising clergy were “evil priests working hand in glove with the kings of the earth, who show that they have no king but Caesar.” To the Donatists, the church was a “small body of saved surrounded by the unregenerate mass.”12 This is, of course, the biblical view.
Augustine, on the other hand, saw the church of his day as a mixture of believers and unbelievers, in which purity and evil should be allowed to exist side by side for the sake of unity. He used the power of the state to compel church attendance (as Calvin also would 1,200 years later): “Whoever was not found within the Church was not asked the reason, but was to be corrected and converted....”13 Calvin followed his mentor Augustine in enforcing church attendance and participation in the sacraments by threats (and worse) against the citizens of Geneva. Augustine “identified the Donatists as heretics...who could be subjected to imperial legislation [and force] in exactly the same way as other criminals and misbelievers, including poisoners and pagans.”14 Frend says of Augustine, “The questing, sensitive youth had become the father of the inquisition.”15
Though he preferred persuasion if possible, Augustine supported military force against those who were rebaptized as believers after conversion to Christ and for other alleged heretics. In his controversy with the Donatists, using a distorted and un-Christian interpretation of Luke:14:23
,16 Augustine declared:
Why therefore should not the Church use force in compelling her lost sons to return?... The Lord Himself said, “Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in....” Wherefore is the power which the Church has received...through the religious character and faith of kings...the instrument by which those who are found in the highways and hedges—that is, in heresies and schisms—are compelled to come in, and let them not find fault with being compelled.17
Sadly, Calvin put into effect in Geneva the very principles of punishment, coercion, and death that Augustine advocated and that the Roman Catholic Church followed consistently for centuries. Henry H. Milman writes: “Augustinianism was worked up into a still more rigid and uncompromising system by the severe intellect of Calvin.”18 And he justified himself by Augustine’s erroneous interpretation of Luke:14:23
. How could any who today hail Calvin as a great exegete accept such abuse of this passage?
Compel? Isn’t that God’s job through Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace? Compel those for whom Christ didn’t die and whom God has predestined to eternal torment? This verse refutes Calvinism no matter how it is intepreted!https://www.thebereancall.org/content/july-2012-classic
hope this helps !!!
Arial
Active member
The debate isn't about Augustine or what he taught and it is not about what other Calvinists had to say about it. That is just shifting the point away from the subject which was whether or not your aversion to Calvinism which you taught for four decades is based on a misunderstanding of what Calvinism teaches. It is obvious to me from what you say about it that you do not understand it because you state it wrong. I had said that in your attempt to prove what Calvinism teaches on penal substitution you quote Reformed/Calvinists completely out of all context from which the isolated quote comes. Making them to be saying something not at all the same as what you are accusing them of. You use the same tactic of "proof texts" to debunk what you call the beliefs of Calvinism.
To which you replied in true schoolyard form, TULIP is based on isolated verses and presuppositions, blah blah blah and began tallking about Augustine.
What are the isolated verses and presuppositions on which tulip is based?
civic
Well-known member
For every single verse you will use to support any point in tulip I will give you 10 that oppose it. The biblical ratio is overwhelming against every single point in tulip. Its cherry picking scripture. Its isolating verses. Look at any tulip outline as proof.
Arial
Active member
That is quite a statement with no proof of accuracy whatsoever. But what I asked for was what those isolated scriptures and presuppositions in tulip are.
Though I often quote a scripture or scriptures supporting what I say just to show I am not making it up, I do not use any scripture as a proof texts and I have debunked everyone that you use to support your view. I get no actual response or counter debunking to what I present, just some more wild unsupported statements, but that aside, I have made my own tulip outline as I do debunk yours, and your authority Lorraine whatever, I debunked his outline point by point in the other forum. And there it sits all by its lonesome.
When people arrive at the end of the road in actually being able to debunk something that applies the whole counsel of God (do you truly know what that means?) they simply begin to cry things like "cherry picking", accusing others of what they surely must know is all they have been doing from the start. Whether or not it is true of the other person, or if they even bother to check and see if it is, does not matter in the least. Just throw the words out there. It sounds as though it carries authority. Not.
civic
Well-known member
Take and point in tulip and give your verses and let’s put it to the test .
Arial
Active member
As I said, I already did that in the other forum, addressed to you, and it was ignored.
I will do it again. TULIP defined according to my understanding of the doctrinal positions. But not right now. I need a break.
Don't ignore it this time and by that I don't mean simply counter with a proof text, but counter with who God is. I will be presenting it from the premise of who God is.
civic
Well-known member
Give scripture to support your points being made otherwise it’s hearsay .
Johann
Well-known member
What is even more shocking is to read Isaiah 53 in Hebrew.
Johann.
Arial
Active member
That is one of my favorites, though I like most.
Johann
Well-known member
Amen brother-we are in the end times and need discernment from the Ruach HaKodesh to discern error from truth.
1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1Jn 4:1 Chaverim, do not believe every ruach. [YIRMEYAH 29:8] But test the ruchot (spirits), if they be of Hashem, because many nevi'ei sheker have gone out into the Olam Hazeh.
try = test, prove. By the Word of God. Greek. dokimazo. See Rom_1:28 with Rom_12:2.
believe not: Deu_13:1-5; Pro_14:15; Jer_5:31, Jer_29:8-9; Mat_7:15-16, Mat_24:4-5; Rom_16:18; 2Pe_2:1
try: Luk_12:57; Act_17:11; Rom_16:19; 1Co_14:29; 1Th_5:21; Rev_2:2
many: 1Jn_2:18; Mat_24:5, Mat_24:23-26; Mar_13:21; Luk_21:8; Act_20:29; 1Ti_4:1; 2Ti_3:13; 2Pe_2:1; 2Jn_1:7
I am really glad to be here.
Johann.
Johann
Well-known member
Another interesting link
Jesus, Islam, and Atonement for Sin
One of the most common Muslim objections to Christianity is that it would be unjust and unfair for God to punish Jesus for the sins of other...
Johann
Well-known member
Another interesting link
Jesus, Islam, and Atonement for Sin
One of the most common Muslim objections to Christianity is that it would be unjust and unfair for God to punish Jesus for the sins of other...www.answeringmuslims.com
sethproton
Active member
I think at the heart of this is understanding what the word "atonement" means.
It means to soothe anger thru an offering.
Christ's blood did that. When He offered His pure blood to the Father. the Father smelled it and His anger was soothed away.
What remained? To receive Christ to indwell us and in doing so receive the forgiveness bought with His blood.
Johann
Well-known member
kâphar
kaw-far'
A primitive root; to cover (specifically with bitumen); figuratively to expiate or condone, to placate or cancel: - appease, make (an) atonement, cleanse, disannul, forgive, be merciful, pacify, pardon, to pitch, purge (away), put off, (make) reconcile (-liation).
LXX Related Word(s)
G37 agiazo
G2433 hilaskomai
G2511 katharizo
G851 aph aireo
G863 aph iemi
BDB Definition:
1) to cover, purge, make an atonement, make reconciliation, cover over with pitch
1a) (Qal) to coat or cover with pitch
1b) (Piel)
1b1) to cover over, pacify, propitiate
1b2) to cover over, atone for sin, make atonement for
1b3) to cover over, atone for sin and persons by legal rites
1c) (Pual)
1c1) to be covered over
1c2) to make atonement for
1d) (Hithpael) to be covered
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root
Lev 16:8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat.
Lev 16:9 And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the LORD'S lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering.
Lev 16:10 But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness.
Lev 16:11 And Aaron shall bring the bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and shall make an atonement for himself, and for his house, and shall kill the bullock of the sin offering which is for himself:
Lev 16:12 And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before the LORD, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the vail:
Lev 16:13 And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the LORD, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that is upon the testimony, that he die not:
Lev 16:14 And he shall take of the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it with his finger upon the mercy seat eastward; and before the mercy seat shall he sprinkle of the blood with his finger seven times.
Lev 16:15 Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the vail, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercy seat:
Lev 16:16 And he shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness.
Lev 16:17 And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place, until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel.
Lev 16:18 And he shall go out unto the altar that is before the LORD, and make an atonement for it; and shall take of the blood of the bullock, and of the blood of the goat, and put it upon the horns of the altar round about.
Lev 16:19 And he shall sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger seven times, and cleanse it, and hallow it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel.
Lev 16:20 And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat:
Lev 16:21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness:
Lev 16:22 And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.
J.
sethproton
Active member
Thanks for the backup.
civic
Well-known member
Can you quote a passage about the atonement and provide a definition from the text about the anger part ? Thanks !
sethproton
Active member
Gen 8:20-21 - here atonement in the Hebrew means to appease or pacify
1 John 2:2 Related to propitiation which in the Greek means to appease of pacify.
In both cases God's anger is soothed.
