Christ's Finished Atonement or Christ's Failure Atonement

[Kermos]

Christ atonement is complete in that “…from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. (2 Cor 5:16-19)

Atonement makes forgiveness possible, it does not make forgiveness finished! Atonement releases God from the necessity of wrath against us. That was the specific purpose and goal of the atonement: to reconcile the world to God!


Doug

Your exclamatory "Atonement makes forgiveness possible, it does not make forgiveness finished" nullifies the forgiveness of sin in Christ's Blood, and your exclamatory is driven by your Free-willian Philosophy, not the Word of God (see the prior post #57 to you in addition to this post). Free-will is a misnomer and non existent, and this fact is shown in the following.

Car and Truck Analogy​

"Not forced" and "detached" are referring to the the same concept with respect to free-will. Perhaps an analogy will help.

Imagine a shiny red sports car free and zipping through mountain roads. The car's engine roaring through the straight aways, and the car coasting into the curves with the racer's foot anticipatorially over the accelerator pedal, ready for the scream of the tires as the car leaves the curve entering the next straightaway.

When the car is detached from a tow truck, then the self-propelled car is not forced by the tow truck; moreover, the car moves because of the car's engine, so the car is forced by the car's own engine itself.

On the other hand...

When the car is attached to a tow truck, then the car is forced by the tow truck; moreover, the car moves because of the tow truck's engine, so the car is not forced by the car's own engine.

We do not say "the engine is free to drive the roads", but we do say "the car is free to drive the roads". After all, the engine by itself goes nowhere because it requires the drivetrain, the wheels, the chassis, and so on; therefore, we refer to the whole system as a car, and "car" is the proper level of abstraction (or classification) to indicate as "free to drive the roads". A tow truck is also "free to drive the roads", so "car" and "tow truck" are at the same abstraction level in reference to "free to drive the roads".

On the other hand, "engine" is at the wrong abstraction level in reference to "free to drive the roads" when "car" and "tow truck" are being compared and contrasted with respect to "free to drive the roads". The "car" and the "tow truck" are vehicles, and each vehicle has it's own "engine".

There is no such thing as a free-engine driving around the roads because a free-engine lacks wheels, a passenger compartment, chassis, etc. A free engine does not have a car, so a free-engine is an absurd and nonsense concept.

We must compare like-for-like to arrive at accurate conclusions, so the "car" and the "tow truck" are similarly classed as vehicles for truthful comparison purposes, yet the "tow truck" is dissimilar to the "car engine" which means these fail like-for-like comparison purposes; in other words, the tow truck being compared to the car's engine is a comparison at two different levels of abstraction which renders an illogical comparison resulting in a false conclusion.

For purposes of this car and tow truck analogy, the engine is analogous to "will", and the car is analogous to a person, and the tow truck is analogous to God. As can be endemic to analogies, this analogy employs shadow that is overwhelmingly inferior to the substance, yet it accurately and sufficiently conveys the concept.

Essentially, the word "free" is the wrong terminology in the phrase "free-will" because a "will" is attached to a particular person; therefore, the appropriate terminology for a person's self-controlled "will" is "self-will" for humans (2 Peter 2:9-10).

Truly, Free-willian Philosophers are talking about "detached will" in reference to free-will, so freewill is a nonsense word.

Since the word free-will is a senseless, self-contradictory word, then the word freewill is also an unbiblical word.

In Biblical terminology, a person is "driven" by self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10), or a person is "driven" by the Will of God (Philippians 2:13).

As I wrote previously, largely, I use free will to mean man choosing toward God, emphatically Lord Jesus Christ. This narrows the focus, so the distinction between salvation (Philippians 2:13) and damnation (2 Peter 2:9-10) is highly relevant.

Atonement always includes forgiveness because atonement makes one to be "at one" with the Lord God Almighty!

 

[TibiasDad]

Your exclamatory "Atonement makes forgiveness possible, it does not make forgiveness finished" nullifies the forgiveness of sin in Christ's Blood, and your exclamatory is driven by your Free-willian Philosophy, not the Word of God (see the prior post #57 to you in addition to this post). Free-will is a misnomer and non existent, and this fact is shown in the following.

Car and Truck Analogy​

"Not forced" and "detached" are referring to the the same concept with respect to free-will. Perhaps an analogy will help.

Imagine a shiny red sports car free and zipping through mountain roads. The car's engine roaring through the straight aways, and the car coasting into the curves with the racer's foot anticipatorially over the accelerator pedal, ready for the scream of the tires as the car leaves the curve entering the next straightaway.

When the car is detached from a tow truck, then the self-propelled car is not forced by the tow truck; moreover, the car moves because of the car's engine, so the car is forced by the car's own engine itself.

On the other hand...

When the car is attached to a tow truck, then the car is forced by the tow truck; moreover, the car moves because of the tow truck's engine, so the car is not forced by the car's own engine.

We do not say "the engine is free to drive the roads", but we do say "the car is free to drive the roads". After all, the engine by itself goes nowhere because it requires the drivetrain, the wheels, the chassis, and so on; therefore, we refer to the whole system as a car, and "car" is the proper level of abstraction (or classification) to indicate as "free to drive the roads". A tow truck is also "free to drive the roads", so "car" and "tow truck" are at the same abstraction level in reference to "free to drive the roads".

On the other hand, "engine" is at the wrong abstraction level in reference to "free to drive the roads" when "car" and "tow truck" are being compared and contrasted with respect to "free to drive the roads". The "car" and the "tow truck" are vehicles, and each vehicle has it's own "engine".

There is no such thing as a free-engine driving around the roads because a free-engine lacks wheels, a passenger compartment, chassis, etc. A free engine does not have a car, so a free-engine is an absurd and nonsense concept.

We must compare like-for-like to arrive at accurate conclusions, so the "car" and the "tow truck" are similarly classed as vehicles for truthful comparison purposes, yet the "tow truck" is dissimilar to the "car engine" which means these fail like-for-like comparison purposes; in other words, the tow truck being compared to the car's engine is a comparison at two different levels of abstraction which renders an illogical comparison resulting in a false conclusion.

For purposes of this car and tow truck analogy, the engine is analogous to "will", and the car is analogous to a person, and the tow truck is analogous to God. As can be endemic to analogies, this analogy employs shadow that is overwhelmingly inferior to the substance, yet it accurately and sufficiently conveys the concept.

Essentially, the word "free" is the wrong terminology in the phrase "free-will" because a "will" is attached to a particular person; therefore, the appropriate terminology for a person's self-controlled "will" is "self-will" for humans (2 Peter 2:9-10).

Truly, Free-willian Philosophers are talking about "detached will" in reference to free-will, so freewill is a nonsense word.

Since the word free-will is a senseless, self-contradictory word, then the word freewill is also an unbiblical word.

In Biblical terminology, a person is "driven" by self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10), or a person is "driven" by the Will of God (Philippians 2:13).

As I wrote previously, largely, I use free will to mean man choosing toward God, emphatically Lord Jesus Christ. This narrows the focus, so the distinction between salvation (Philippians 2:13) and damnation (2 Peter 2:9-10) is highly relevant.

Atonement always includes forgiveness because atonement makes one to be "at one" with the Lord God Almighty!

Men with wills are not inanimate objects like cars. Cars are subject to the will of the driver. If a tow truck is needed, it is because the/a driver was reckless. The car itself never acts independently so as to be responsible.

Your application of the difference between the car and the tow truck and the correspondences of “the engine is analogous to "will", and the car is analogous to a person, and the tow truck is analogous to God” is gratuitous and self-stultifying.

Doug

 

[Kermos]

You conveniently leave out confession and repentance from your equation. They have to happen before forgiveness can happen. The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God. That is the logical order according to Scripture.


Doug

You leave out that God imparts repentance inside of man - as explained to you according to Holy Scripture in the very post to which you replied:

We children of God repent by God’s working, for the Christ of us Christians says “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to babes” (Matthew 11:25), and the apostles and elders are in accord with Jesus’ words with thier saying, “Well then, God has given to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life” (Acts 11:18), so clearly, Jesus’ words in Matthew 11:25 state that God exclusively causes man to think differently after an encounter with God (repent means to think differently afterward).
​

Oh, look, you failed to judge what is right (Luke 12:57) with your "You conveniently leave out confession and repentance".

Christ's finished atonement includes forgiveness of sin because this is precisely what Holy Spirit inspired John wrote with "He is the atonement for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2), so your separation of forgiveness from atonement fails both spiritually and logically.

Your "The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God" very badly places in last place that which is in first place according to the Truth (John 14:6) because the Christ of us Christians says the first place is "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God" (John 3:3) bringing the Life (John 14:6) into the new man which includes Christ's finished atonement securing the new man's forgiveness of sin thus the new man reconciled as at one with God (look at the last 3 words of yours quoted, there, too, where you put the first as the last).

You still have people like Nancy of the world who died and goes to hell being atoned for by Christ, so you cling to Christ's failure atonement (see the opening post).

 

[TibiasDad]

Christ's finished atonement includes forgiveness of sin because this is precisely what Holy Spirit inspired John wrote with "He is the atonement for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2), so your separation of forgiveness from atonement fails both spiritually and logically.

The whole world also: the whole world are not believers. “Not ours only”, meaning not just current believers, “but also”, indicating a shift in direction or change of focus, “for [the sins] of the whole world”, which is everyone who is not currently a believer, ie, all sinners everywhere!

If forgiveness is achieved by the atonement itself, aside from belief, confession and repentance, then the whole world is saved, and you are a universalist!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

You still have people like Nancy of the world who died and goes to hell being atoned for by Christ, so you cling to Christ's failure atonement (see the opening post).

According to 2 Cor 5:18-19, the purpose of the atonement was singular: to reconcile the world to God so God could not count men’s sins against them.

18All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

This is the gospel message, the message of reconciliation!

Doug

 

[Kermos]

You conveniently leave out confession and repentance from your equation. They have to happen before forgiveness can happen. The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God. That is the logical order according to Scripture.


Doug

Another spiritual error of your "The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God" is that you confusedly collided your first place "atonement" (which indicates the state of being "at one" with God) with your last place of "one with God".

(This post is related with post #63)

You still have people like Nancy of the world who died and goes to hell being atoned for by Christ, so you cling to Christ's failure atonement (see the opening post).

 

[Kermos]

You conveniently leave out confession and repentance from your equation. They have to happen before forgiveness can happen. The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God. That is the logical order according to Scripture.


Doug

There is so much incredibly wrong with your "The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God" that it requires this another post.

You have conviction of sin outside of the Holy Spirit, yet the Christ of us Christians says "And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment" (John 16:8).

Your "reconciliation process order" is wrong.

(This post is related with post #63)

You still have people like Nancy of the world who died and goes to hell being atoned for by Christ, so you cling to Christ's failure atonement (see the opening post).

 

[TibiasDad]

You have conviction of sin outside of the Holy Spirit, yet the Christ of us Christians says "And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment" (John 16:8).

False, I have always said clearly that the Holy Spirit’s purpose was, in part, to convict the world of sin! I have never denied this. Stop creating straw men to argue against me!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

You still have people like Nancy of the world who died and goes to hell being atoned for by Christ, so you cling to Christ's failure atonement (see the opening post).

What greater sin than despising the sacrifice Christ made for all of us. Such is hell worthy!

Doug

 

[Kermos]

You conveniently leave out confession and repentance from your equation. They have to happen before forgiveness can happen. The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God. That is the logical order according to Scripture.


Doug

The monumental wrong with your "The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God" requires this another post.

God not counting men’s sins against them is forgiveness of sins for Christ shedding His Blood on the cross absolutely results in forgiveness without exception for the Holy Spirit reveals to us Christians "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins" (Hebrews 9:22) and "we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son" (Romans 5:10) and the Holy Spirit revealing of Christ that "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2).

Upon God not counting men’s sins against them, we Christians know we are forgiven. You do not believe that God not counting men’s sins against them means that you are forgiven.

Your "reconciliation process order" is dead wrong.

(This post is related with post #63)

You still have people like Nancy of the world who died and goes to hell being atoned for by Christ, so you cling to Christ's failure atonement (see the opening post).

 

[Kermos]

You conveniently leave out confession and repentance from your equation. They have to happen before forgiveness can happen. The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God. That is the logical order according to Scripture.


Doug

The God demotion and man exaltation of your "The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God" requires this another post.

The good of confessing sin and faithfulness of walking in the Light are fruit of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23).

​

5 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; 7 but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. 8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.​

(1 John 1:5-10)​

​

I confess by God's grace for God's glory that I, a sinner, know for certain that the Blood of Jesus washes my sins away. This is how it goes for all of us Christians.

The if-then logic statements by Holy Spirit inspired Apostle John are indicators of evidence (fruit of the Holy Spirit), not cause and effect (specifically the conditional does not cause the predicate to be in effect for the if-then statements).

A person confessing sin does not cause Christ to be faithful and righteous to forgive the person’s sins and to cleanse the person from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). In Truth (John 14:6), the cause that the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses the person indicates the effect that the person does walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light (1 John 1:7) - fruit of the Holy Spirit evidence in the person's action.

In your Free-willian Philosophy, you set the order from man free-will confess to God compulsory forgive, thus you make forgiveness dependent upon your free-will confession instead of Christ's Blood alone.

Your "reconciliation process order" is spiritually wrong.

(This post is related with post #63)

You still have people like Nancy of the world who died and goes to hell being atoned for by Christ, so you cling to Christ's failure atonement (see the opening post).

 

[TibiasDad]

The God demotion and man exaltation of your "The cause of reconciliation is the whole process in order: atonement, God not counting men’s sins against them, conviction of sin, confess and repentance of sin, forgiveness of those sins, and the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man making him spiritually alive and one with God" requires this another post.

In other words, you can’t answer it now! If my order is wrong, disprove it! What order would you put it in?

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

The if-then logic statements by Holy Spirit inspired Apostle John are indicators of evidence (fruit of the Holy Spirit), not cause and effect (specifically the conditional does not cause the predicate to be in effect for the if-then statements).

ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν,

ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν (If we confess) is a subjunctive mood indicating a necessary condition for something to occur.


πιστός ἐστιν καὶ δίκαιος, (faithful he is and just)

ἵνα ἀφῇ ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας (in order that he might our sins forgive)

Again we have a subjunctive that correlates to the earlier use of the subjunctive of “if we confess”. The hina clause (in order that) demonstrates the necessity of the first “if” occurring “in order that” the second subjunctive (he might forgive) can occur.


καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀδικίας (and that he might cleanse us from all unrighteousness.)

Again another subjunctive mood verb
(might cleanse us) that can only happen “if we confess.”


Doug

 

[Kermos]

I believe that “the atoning sacrifice” is a gerund (note the “ing” ending), a verb acting as a noun. To atone, is something that one does for another, thus it is a verb. The atonement is an event, and thus a noun.

The fascinating thing is the nouns propitiation and atonement are synonymous, and the gerund phrase the atoning sacrifice is a noun phrase, and the noun "atonement" defines as an offering to appease (satisfy) an angry, offended party (italicized portion is from Strong's Greek: 2434. ἱλασμός (hilasmos) -- Propitiation, Atoning Sacrifice from BibleHub.com), so the word "sacrifice" is repetitive, so the whole noun phrase the atoning sacrifice can be replaced by the word atonement in the Holy Spirit inspired "He is the offering to satisfy an angry, offended party sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2). The word "sacrifice" may be dropped as shown in the next paragraph.

Now, a noun alone resides for Christ's finished atonement in "He is the atonement for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2).

No matter how you try to undo the Holy Spirit inspired words, you fail.

Your saying it is “a bad” does not mean you are right!

Your redefinition of atonement in 1 John 2:2 to eliminate forgiveness out of the atonement is bad for you wrote "atonement is not forgiveness" (proof post #57) because atonement includes appease/satisfy thus forgiveness.

Forgiveness is included in "He is the atonement for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2).

The atonement prepares us, sets the stage for forgiveness by allowing God to not count men sins against them. Scripturally, atonement come first, then conviction of sin, confession/repentance of sin, and then forgiveness of sin.


Of course there is no forgiveness without the shedding of blood, this simply means the shedding of blood necessarily precedes forgiveness. And none who are reconciled were reconciled without the death of his son.

The whole world is atoned for, but the whole world is not saved. Forgiveness is available to anyone because of the atonement. All murderers , adulterers and otherwise sinners can be saved! (Save for the unpardonable sin.) That is the “good news”!

Doug

Again, you replaced atonement with salvation to argue from the perspective of salvation instead of atonement, just look at your confused "The whole world is atoned for, but the whole world is not saved".

Holy Spirit inspired John did not limit "He is the atonement for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2).

You limited, John limited not.

Oddly enough, you argued for limited atonement!

You still have people like Nancy of the world who died and goes to hell being atoned for by Christ, so you cling to Christ's failure atonement (see the opening post).

Free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men (Matthew 15:9).

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE JESUS!!!

 

[TibiasDad]

Again, you replaced atonement with salvation to argue from the perspective of salvation instead of atonement, just look at your confused "The whole world is atoned for, but the whole world is not saved".

Holy Spirit inspired John did not limit "He is the atonement for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2).

You limited, John limited not.

Is the whole world saved?

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE JESUS!!!

And his Sovereignty chooses that what we choose determines if we lose!

Doug

 

[civic]

You have God angry at His own fault. And He can't help it because He has no other existing libertarian choice than to predetermine us. You make God a failure.

Those in hell were atoned for in as far as their sins were included in the atonement but doesn't mean already forgiven. Otherwise people wouldn't be dead in sin for years before getting saved if at all. That's where you make the atonement/God a failure.

But like I said, God prefers libertarian free will over keeping people out of hell. So the option of failure is His preference. Not like He couldn't help it. He could ensure more people to heaven if He wanted, and maybe has.



You're the one who has Christ failing, leaving people dead in sin for years before finally getting saved, despite having already died for sins.



Paul could have refused. But if Paul would have refused, God would either have cajoled him to do it anyway or chosen someone else. But God was going to see to it that His plan got fulfilled, as with Moses, Jonah and Esther, which will be shown later below.

John 3:3 (KJV) Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

^Jesus was convincing this man to want the new birth while he was still dead in sin.


Acts 16:30 (KJV) And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

^This man wanted the new birth ie salvation but didn't know how, and may never get saved if somebody doesn't tell him how.


John 15:16 (KJV) Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

^Jonah was chosen yet refused God's calling, so God later roughed him up to convince him. ... And ...

... Moses was chosen but refused to speak for God, so God got angry and instead chose Aaron to be Moses' spokesman. ...

Paul just libertarianly happened to choose what God said in the first place. Foreknown of course.


God chose Esther, but if she refused, God would have chosen someone else. ...

Esther 4:14 (KJV) For ...

... **if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, then shall there enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place;** ...

but thou and thy father's house shall be destroyed: and ...

... **who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this?**


1 John 2:2 (KJV) And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

^This means He can now proceed to forgive sins, not that people are already limitedly prepicked and already forgiven.



Jesus was countering that they thought the work of God was pursuing physical provision such as food or manna. So the work of God was the work God wanted them to do ie faith, not lack of libertarian free will.



This is a command, proving libertarian free will.

Well said brother

 

[TibiasDad]

Those in hell were atoned for in as far as their sins were included in the atonement but doesn't mean already forgiven.

Amen!

Doug