Christ's Finished Atonement or Christ's Failure Atonement

[Kermos]

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

Your post does nothing to change the following:

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]

TibiasDad, God causes me to post indicating my belief in Christ,

God doesn’t “cause” you to post. He allows you to post. If God causes us to post, then he causes me to post too, which means that God causes one of us to post a falsehood.

so you bear false witness such as "you are a universalist".

I said “If forgiveness is achieved by the atonement itself, aside from belief, confession and repentance”, which is what you have argued for, “then the whole world is saved,” because the atonement means forgiveness is accomplished, and thus the whole world is necessarily saved, “and you are a universalist!”

That is the logical conclusion of your argument.


Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

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:

Not irresistibly! God grants us to repent, which is an act of grace, but he does not make us repent irresistibly. He gives us the acceptance of our repentance, which he does not have to accept.

Doug

 

[Kermos]

@TibiasDad, 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" within 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", so you produced another spiritual error.

(You neglected to post a reply directly to post #66 which was the second of five posts about your "order of reconciliation", so this post maintains sequence.)

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]

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

Look at your incredibly wrong way of putting "conviction of sin" well in advance of "the Holy Spirit entering the heart of man" within your "order of reconciliation" which you publicly posted "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" (proof post #67).

Lord Jesus Christ says "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of Truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you" (John 14:16-17)

Either your "False" is anti-truth, or you are incredibly spiritually confused, or both.

A valid point is that the Holy Spirit is in a person at the time the person is convicted of sin which demolishes your "order of reconciliation".

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]

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

Doug

See, you have Christ's failure atonement for people like Nancy (see the original post) in hell. Your first paragraph conveys such which is the point about people like Nancy (see the original post) who think nothing of the atonement/sacrifice Christ offered to God, see the closing paragraph of the post to which you replied, below.

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]

Your "reconciliation process order" is wrong.

Then what is the right order according to you?

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).

The purpose of the atonement, according to scripture, was to reconcile the world to the Father. That’s what happened, so Christ did not fail! The atonement gave the Father the means to not count men’s sins against them. That happened, so Christ did not fail!

Doug

 

[Kermos]

Dear @TibiasDad,

Lord Jesus Christ says "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin" (John 8:34) and "if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed" (John 8:36), so 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" is because 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.

(You neglected to post a reply directly to post #70 which was the fourth of five posts about your "order of reconciliation", so this is post maintains sequence.)

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).

 

[civic]

Dear @TibiasDad,

Lord Jesus Christ says "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin" (John 8:34) and "if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed" (John 8:36), so 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" is because 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.

(You neglected to post a reply directly to post #70 which was the fourth of five posts about your "order of reconciliation", so this is post maintains sequence.)

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).

strawman alert.

Scripture refutes your false claims on the atonement. Without faith one cannot be saved and have their sins atoned. The atonement made forgiveness of sins available to all the world, everyone. Without faith it is impossible to please God and have ones sins atoned for and be saved.


John 1:29
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

Hebrews 2:9
But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

Titus 2:11
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,

Titus 3:4
But when the kindness and the love of mankind of God our Savior appeared

John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

1 Timothy 2:4
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord does not delay his promise, as some regard “delay,” but he is patient with you, not wishing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

1 John 2:2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

2 Corinthians 5:14
For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died.

In 1 John 4:10 hilasmos/ translated as propitiation , the same word used in 1 John 2:2. In some translations there cannot mean sooth anger and must mean something else( Expiation) than what is taught in christendom. God says love 3 times in that passage so it cannot mean anger being soothed. It means expiation as in covering for sin.

I always go to Christ who is God as my primary source of truth. His teaching must not contradict anyone else in scripture. If there seems to be a contradiction then it is with mans understanding on the topic not from Jesus teaching. He is God and He is the authority on all things. Not once did Jesus even hint Hid death was propitiation as taught by the reformers meaning appeasing an angry deity- that concept is pagan. That is why propitiation is not a good translation, expiation is the better translation and meaning in 1 John.

How did He view His own death- the atonement ?

We see God the Son described His own death, the Atonement in 4 ways. Theology begins with God. He said His death was a Substitution, a Ransom, a Passover, a Sacrifice and for forgiveness of sins- Expiation

1- Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 15:13 Substitution, Ransom

2-No man takes my life I lay it down and I will take it up again- John 10:18 Substitution, Ransom

3- I lay My life down for the sheep- John 10:15 Substitution, Ransom

4- Jesus viewed His death as the Passover John 6:51

5-just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a Ransom for many- Matthew 20:28

6-I Am the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for the sheep- Substitution, John 10:11

7-Jesus said in John 11:50- nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish- Substitution

8 -This is my blood of the Covenant which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins- Matthew 26:28- Expiation

The N.T. writers' emphasis on the atonement is on the side of expiation rather than propitiation, which is only used twice in the epistle of 1 John. Gods’ wrath is still future and will judge those who reject His Sons atonement for sin. Gods’ wrath was not poured out on the Son for sin otherwise there would be no future wrath from God because of sin.

If we were to read propitiation ( appease an angry god as the meaning ) in 1 John 4:10 look at how absurd if reads.

This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to appease our angry god , to appease His anger, to appease his angry self etc.......for our sins.

That makes no sense at all theologically , grammatically or contextually. It’s a contradiction, an oxymoron.

Here are the only three uses of “propitiation” in the KJV:

“Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation (G2435) through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” (Rom 3:25-26)

“And he is the propitiation (G2434) for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” (1 John 2:2)

“Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation (G2434) for our sins.” (1 John 4:10)

As we will see, this is a very poor word to use to translate the original Greek.

Here are the definitions given for the Greek words used for propitiation:

Original Word Definitions

G2434 ἱλασμός hilasmos hil-as-mos’
a root word; n m;
AV-propitiation 2; 2
1) an appeasing, propitiating
2) the means of appeasing, a propitiation

G2435 ἱλαστήριον hilasterion hil-as-tay’-ree-on
from a derivative of G2433; n n;
AV-propitiation 1, mercyseat 1; 2
1) relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation
1a) used of the cover of the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies, which was sprinkled with the blood of the expiatory victim on the annual day of atonement (this rite signifying that the life of the people, the loss of which they had merited by their sins, was offered to God in the blood as the life of the victim, and that God by this ceremony was appeased and their sins expiated); hence the lid of expiation, the propitiatory
1b) an expiatory sacrifice
1c) an expiatory victim

Since G2435 comes from G2433 we should look at that word:

2433 ἱλάσκομαι hilaskomai hil-as’-kom-ahee
middle voice from the same as 2436; v;
AV-be merciful 1, make reconciliation 1; 2
1) to render one’s self, to appease, conciliate to one’s self
1a) to become propitious, be placated or appeased
1b) to be propitious, be gracious, be merciful
2) to expiate, make propitiation for

There is only one other verse that uses “hilasterion” (G2435):

“And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; (G2435) of which we cannot now speak particularly.” (Heb 9:5)

That verse suggests that “hilasterion” is a place where mercy is given – quite different from the usual meaning of propitiation.

So, if that word had been used in Romans 3:25, would that give the verse a different meaning?

“Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation mercy seat …”

It literally means “a place or means of reconciliation, a place where atonement or unity and at-one-ment takes place.”

The only two verses that use “hilaskomai” (G2433) are:

“And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful (G2433) to me a sinner.” (Luke 18:13)

“Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for (G2433) the sins of the people.” (Heb 2:17)

Those verses do not suggest anything like propitiation. What are the effects of the translation of a word meaning mercy seat as propitiation? They can’t be good.

Where did the Concept of Propitiation Come From?

Many (if not all) pagan cultures embrace the concept of propitiation and appeasement. Here is another example of modern misunderstanding:

“… Propitiation is an ancient word, which we as Christians have in common with other world religions. To propitiate a god is to offer a sacrifice that turns aside the god’s wrath. Anyone who believes in a god knows that they need some way to stay on the friendly side of that god. So they give gifts to the god, or serve in the temple, or give alms. And if the god is angry with them, they pay a price, or make a sacrifice, or find some way to soothe the god’s anger: they propitiate him.”(https://maney.us/blog/2014/03/25/trevin-wax-pagan-propitiation-vs-biblical-propitiation/)

Do we really need a way to stay on the friendly side of God? What about “God is love”?

Here are verses using “propitiation” (in the KJV):

“God presented Jesus as the way and the means of restoration. Now, through the trust established by the evidence of God’s character revealed when Christ died, we may partake of the Remedy procured by Christ. God did this to demonstrate that he is right and good — because in his forbearance he suspended, for a time, the ultimate consequence of us being out of harmony with his design for life — yet he has been falsely accused of being unfair. 26 He did it to demonstrate at the present time how right and good he is, so that he would also be seen as being right when he heals those who trust in Jesus.” (Rom 3:25-26, )

“This is what real love is: It is not that we have loved God, or that we have done something to get him to love us, but that he loved us so much that he sent his Son to become the Remedy and cure for the infection of sin and selfishness so that through him we might be restored into perfect unity with God.” (1 John 4:10, ) https://characterofgod.org/propitiation-definition/

hope this helps !!!

 

[Kermos]

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

Doug

Your "order of reconciliation"/"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" (proof post #71) has been spiritually proven to be anti-truth because:

1. you place the indwelling Holy Spirit (John 3:3) in last place (proof post #63)
2. you confusedly collide your first place with your last place (proof post #66):
   • your first place is atonement/"at one" with God,
   • your last place is "one with God".
3. you place conviction before the Holy Spirit indwells (proof post #67)
4. God not counting sins is forgiveness (proof post #70).
5. your demote God and exalt man (proof post #71):
   • the Blood of Jesus alone cleanses Christians (1 John 1:5-10).
   • a good confession of sin is fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23).
   • a faithful walk in the Light is fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23).
   • you have man controlling God.
   • if-then logic statements by John show:
     • evidence of the indwelling Holy Spirit
     • not cause and effect, that is, not man causing God to effect.

This is a thread about Christ's atonement, and Christ's finished atonement is reconciliation with God.

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]

Your "order of reconciliation"/"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" (proof post #71) has been spiritually proven to be anti-truth because:

1. you place the indwelling Holy Spirit (John 3:3) in last place (proof post #63)
2. you confusedly collide your first place with your last place (proof post #66):
   • your first place is atonement/"at one" with God,
   • your last place is "one with God".
3. you place conviction before the Holy Spirit indwells (proof post #67)
4. God not counting sins is forgiveness (proof post #70).
5. your demote God and exalt man (proof post #71):
   • the Blood of Jesus alone cleanses Christians (1 John 1:5-10).
   • a good confession of sin is fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23).
   • a faithful walk in the Light is fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23).
   • you have man controlling God.
   • if-then logic statements by John show:
     • evidence of the indwelling Holy Spirit
     • not cause and effect, that is, not man causing God to effect.

This is a thread about Christ's atonement, and Christ's finished atonement is reconciliation with God.

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 @civic said….

Doug

 

[Kermos]

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

TibiasDad, when you wrote '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”', then you eliminated Christ's Blood of the New Covenant!

In grammar, a subjunctive mood verb acts as a bridge between the clause (sentence) subject and the clause object. A verb is the action for the clause subject.

Your illegal grammar and broken syntax wrongly moves one clause's objects to a different clause's subjects even when all clauses involved contain subject/verb/object regarding the following:

​

ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν, πιστός ἐστιν καὶ δίκαιος, ἵνα ἀφῇ ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀδικίας (1 John 1:9).​

​

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)​

​

You quoted ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν (If we confess our sins) in your first paragraph while you eliminated τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν (our sins) in your second paragraph then you performed an illegal grammatical association of ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν (If we confess) subjunctively to πιστός ἐστιν καὶ δίκαιος (He is faithful and righteous) in your third plus fourth paragraphs.

Proper grammar dictates that ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν (If we confess) specifically subjunctively associates with τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν (our sins).

You illegally associate ἵνα ἀφῇ ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀδικίας (to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness) with ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν (If we confess) in your fifth and sixth paragraphs.

Proper grammar dictates that ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀδικίας (us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness) specifically subjunctively associates with πιστός ἐστιν καὶ δίκαιος ἵνα ἀφῇ (He is faithful and righteous to forgive).

Your syntactically disassociated Christ's faithfulneas/righteousness from forgiveness of sins by your illegal grammatical ἵνα (hina - Strong's Greek: 2443 - that, in order that, so that) maneuver to replace Christ's faithfulneas/righteousness with man's confession to achieve man's forgiveness of sins.

Respecting man for the good, the "subjunctive mood indicating a necessary condition for something to occur" is driven by God inside of man "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

The results of your express thoughts are that you believe that you cause Christ to be faithful based on your faulty interpretation of 1 John 1:9, just look at your opening three paragraphs.

 

[TibiasDad]

You illegally associate ἵνα ἀφῇ ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀδικίας (to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness) with ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν (If we confess) in your fifth and sixth paragraphs.

That’s because they are connected ; Christ does not forgive unless there is confession first! It’s not rocket science, not even Greek rocket science; if we confess he is faithful and will forgive us our sins. The subjunctive mood portrays probability and potential. The hina clause, in order that, shows a response to an action. A happens in order that B can occur.

And by the way, there is nothing illegal about it! You may be wrong, but you’re not illegal! It’s not illegal to disagree on this forum.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

Proper grammar dictates that ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν (If we confess) specifically subjunctively associates with τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν (our sins).

1) Of course it does, but this doesn’t mean it is not connected to something else in the sentence.

2) Conditional sentences:
To express a potential or uncertain condition, often with ean (ἐὰν)
ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν

Doug

 

[Kermos]

strawman alert.

Scripture refutes your false claims on the atonement. Without faith one cannot be saved and have their sins atoned. The atonement made forgiveness of sins available to all the world, everyone. Without faith it is impossible to please God and have ones sins atoned for and be saved.


John 1:29
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

Hebrews 2:9
But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

Titus 2:11
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,

Titus 3:4
But when the kindness and the love of mankind of God our Savior appeared

John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

1 Timothy 2:4
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord does not delay his promise, as some regard “delay,” but he is patient with you, not wishing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

1 John 2:2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

2 Corinthians 5:14
For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died.

In 1 John 4:10 hilasmos/ translated as propitiation , the same word used in 1 John 2:2. In some translations there cannot mean sooth anger and must mean something else( Expiation) than what is taught in christendom. God says love 3 times in that passage so it cannot mean anger being soothed. It means expiation as in covering for sin.

I always go to Christ who is God as my primary source of truth. His teaching must not contradict anyone else in scripture. If there seems to be a contradiction then it is with mans understanding on the topic not from Jesus teaching. He is God and He is the authority on all things. Not once did Jesus even hint Hid death was propitiation as taught by the reformers meaning appeasing an angry deity- that concept is pagan. That is why propitiation is not a good translation, expiation is the better translation and meaning in 1 John.

How did He view His own death- the atonement ?

We see God the Son described His own death, the Atonement in 4 ways. Theology begins with God. He said His death was a Substitution, a Ransom, a Passover, a Sacrifice and for forgiveness of sins- Expiation

1- Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 15:13 Substitution, Ransom

2-No man takes my life I lay it down and I will take it up again- John 10:18 Substitution, Ransom

3- I lay My life down for the sheep- John 10:15 Substitution, Ransom

4- Jesus viewed His death as the Passover John 6:51

5-just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a Ransom for many- Matthew 20:28

6-I Am the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for the sheep- Substitution, John 10:11

7-Jesus said in John 11:50- nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish- Substitution

8 -This is my blood of the Covenant which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins- Matthew 26:28- Expiation

The N.T. writers' emphasis on the atonement is on the side of expiation rather than propitiation, which is only used twice in the epistle of 1 John. Gods’ wrath is still future and will judge those who reject His Sons atonement for sin. Gods’ wrath was not poured out on the Son for sin otherwise there would be no future wrath from God because of sin.

If we were to read propitiation ( appease an angry god as the meaning ) in 1 John 4:10 look at how absurd if reads.

This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to appease our angry god , to appease His anger, to appease his angry self etc.......for our sins.

That makes no sense at all theologically , grammatically or contextually. It’s a contradiction, an oxymoron.

Here are the only three uses of “propitiation” in the KJV:

“Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation (G2435) through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” (Rom 3:25-26)

“And he is the propitiation (G2434) for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” (1 John 2:2)

“Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation (G2434) for our sins.” (1 John 4:10)

As we will see, this is a very poor word to use to translate the original Greek.

Here are the definitions given for the Greek words used for propitiation:

Original Word Definitions

G2434 ἱλασμός hilasmos hil-as-mos’
a root word; n m;
AV-propitiation 2; 2
1) an appeasing, propitiating
2) the means of appeasing, a propitiation

G2435 ἱλαστήριον hilasterion hil-as-tay’-ree-on
from a derivative of G2433; n n;
AV-propitiation 1, mercyseat 1; 2
1) relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation
1a) used of the cover of the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies, which was sprinkled with the blood of the expiatory victim on the annual day of atonement (this rite signifying that the life of the people, the loss of which they had merited by their sins, was offered to God in the blood as the life of the victim, and that God by this ceremony was appeased and their sins expiated); hence the lid of expiation, the propitiatory
1b) an expiatory sacrifice
1c) an expiatory victim

Since G2435 comes from G2433 we should look at that word:

2433 ἱλάσκομαι hilaskomai hil-as’-kom-ahee
middle voice from the same as 2436; v;
AV-be merciful 1, make reconciliation 1; 2
1) to render one’s self, to appease, conciliate to one’s self
1a) to become propitious, be placated or appeased
1b) to be propitious, be gracious, be merciful
2) to expiate, make propitiation for

There is only one other verse that uses “hilasterion” (G2435):

“And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; (G2435) of which we cannot now speak particularly.” (Heb 9:5)

That verse suggests that “hilasterion” is a place where mercy is given – quite different from the usual meaning of propitiation.

So, if that word had been used in Romans 3:25, would that give the verse a different meaning?

“Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation mercy seat …”

It literally means “a place or means of reconciliation, a place where atonement or unity and at-one-ment takes place.”

The only two verses that use “hilaskomai” (G2433) are:

“And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful (G2433) to me a sinner.” (Luke 18:13)

“Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for (G2433) the sins of the people.” (Heb 2:17)

Those verses do not suggest anything like propitiation. What are the effects of the translation of a word meaning mercy seat as propitiation? They can’t be good.

Where did the Concept of Propitiation Come From?

Many (if not all) pagan cultures embrace the concept of propitiation and appeasement. Here is another example of modern misunderstanding:

“… Propitiation is an ancient word, which we as Christians have in common with other world religions. To propitiate a god is to offer a sacrifice that turns aside the god’s wrath. Anyone who believes in a god knows that they need some way to stay on the friendly side of that god. So they give gifts to the god, or serve in the temple, or give alms. And if the god is angry with them, they pay a price, or make a sacrifice, or find some way to soothe the god’s anger: they propitiate him.”(https://maney.us/blog/2014/03/25/trevin-wax-pagan-propitiation-vs-biblical-propitiation/)

Do we really need a way to stay on the friendly side of God? What about “God is love”?

Here are verses using “propitiation” (in the KJV):

“God presented Jesus as the way and the means of restoration. Now, through the trust established by the evidence of God’s character revealed when Christ died, we may partake of the Remedy procured by Christ. God did this to demonstrate that he is right and good — because in his forbearance he suspended, for a time, the ultimate consequence of us being out of harmony with his design for life — yet he has been falsely accused of being unfair. 26 He did it to demonstrate at the present time how right and good he is, so that he would also be seen as being right when he heals those who trust in Jesus.” (Rom 3:25-26, )

“This is what real love is: It is not that we have loved God, or that we have done something to get him to love us, but that he loved us so much that he sent his Son to become the Remedy and cure for the infection of sin and selfishness so that through him we might be restored into perfect unity with God.” (1 John 4:10, ) https://characterofgod.org/propitiation-definition/

hope this helps !!!

Your "Without faith one cannot be saved" (about salvation) intertwined with your "and have their sins atoned" (about atonement) results in that you detached atonement from salvation in your explanation, after which you left atonement as everyone everywhere in all time but you limited your focus down to only people who have salvation through faith in Christ. You broke the classes of people about whom you were talking because when you changed your focus to salvation then you left Christ's atonement in a state of failure for people like "Nancy of the world".

You switched from atonement over to salvation, then you tried to use your wrongly shifted argument for salvation to address the specific point about atonement.

You believe that Christ's atonement applies to everybody everywhere in all time (the whole world) which means that you believe Christ atoned for people in hell. See the opening post in this thread.

I believe that Christ's atonement applies to only the people whom Christ chooses (the whole world) which means I believe Christ atoned exclusively to people Christ places in the Kingdom of Heaven.

​

He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world​

(1 John 2:2)​

​

you did not choose Me, but I chose you​

(John 15:16)​

​

I chose you out of the world​

(John 15:19, includes atonement)​

​

It's time to move from how you intertwined over to semantics.

You can bounce from ἱλασμός (hilasmos - Strong's Greek: 2434 - Propitiation, Atoning Sacrifice) to ἱλαστήριον (hilastérion - Strong's Greek: 2435 - Propitiation, Atonement Cover, Mercy Seat) to ἱλάσκομαι (hilaskomai - Strong's Greek: 2433 - To propitiate, to appease, to atone for), but the fact is that ἱλασμός (hilasmos - Strong's Greek: 2434 - Propitiation, Atoning Sacrifice) occurs in 2 places in the whole of the New Testament per this Strong's Greek: 2434. ἱλασμός (hilasmos - 2 Occurrences) concordance, and these two locations are:

​

He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.​

(1 John 2:2)​

​

In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.​

(1 John 4:10)​

​

So merciful in Luke 18:13 containing ἱλάσκομαι (hilaskomai - Strong's Greek: 2433 - To propitiate, to appease, to atone for) does not change 1 John 2:2 nor 1 John 4:10; furthermore, an atoning sacrifice in Romans 3:25 containing ἱλαστήριον (hilastérion - Strong's Greek: 2435 - Propitiation, Atonement Cover, Mercy Seat) does not change 1 John 2:2 nor 1 John 4:10.

Now, to the core of your position:

​

If we were to read propitiation ( appease an angry god as the meaning ) in 1 John 4:10 look at how absurd if reads.​

​

This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to appease our angry god , to appease His anger, to appease his angry self etc.......for our sins.​

​

But you mistranslated 1 John 4:10 because here is the proper translation:

​

In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the offering to satisfy the angry, offended Father for our sins.​

(1 John 4:10)​

​

So, Father in Heaven is loving and angry about sin. This is part of the Gospel of Christ! This is not your absurd! This is a blessing!!!

Do you believe that God loves the sinner but hates the sin?

The Word of God is Truth (John 14:6).

In Christ,
Kermos

 

[civic]

Your "Without faith one cannot be saved" (about salvation) intertwined with your "and have their sins atoned" (about atonement) results in that you detached atonement from salvation in your explanation, after which you left atonement as everyone everywhere in all time but you limited your focus down to only people who have salvation through faith in Christ. You broke the classes of people about whom you were talking because when you changed your focus to salvation then you left Christ's atonement in a state of failure for people like "Nancy of the world".

You switched from atonement over to salvation, then you tried to use your wrongly shifted argument for salvation to address the specific point about atonement.

You believe that Christ's atonement applies to everybody everywhere in all time (the whole world) which means that you believe Christ atoned for people in hell. See the opening post in this thread.

I believe that Christ's atonement applies to only the people whom Christ chooses (the whole world) which means I believe Christ atoned exclusively to people Christ places in the Kingdom of Heaven.

​

He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world​

(1 John 2:2)​

​

you did not choose Me, but I chose you​

(John 15:16)​

​

I chose you out of the world​

(John 15:19, includes atonement)​

​

It's time to move from how you intertwined over to semantics.

You can bounce from ἱλασμός (hilasmos - Strong's Greek: 2434 - Propitiation, Atoning Sacrifice) to ἱλαστήριον (hilastérion - Strong's Greek: 2435 - Propitiation, Atonement Cover, Mercy Seat) to ἱλάσκομαι (hilaskomai - Strong's Greek: 2433 - To propitiate, to appease, to atone for), but the fact is that ἱλασμός (hilasmos - Strong's Greek: 2434 - Propitiation, Atoning Sacrifice) occurs in 2 places in the whole of the New Testament per this Strong's Greek: 2434. ἱλασμός (hilasmos - 2 Occurrences) concordance, and these two locations are:

​

He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.​

(1 John 2:2)​

​

In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.​

(1 John 4:10)​

​

So merciful in Luke 18:13 containing ἱλάσκομαι (hilaskomai - Strong's Greek: 2433 - To propitiate, to appease, to atone for) does not change 1 John 2:2 nor 1 John 4:10; furthermore, an atoning sacrifice in Romans 3:25 containing ἱλαστήριον (hilastérion - Strong's Greek: 2435 - Propitiation, Atonement Cover, Mercy Seat) does not change 1 John 2:2 nor 1 John 4:10.

Now, to the core of your position:

​

If we were to read propitiation ( appease an angry god as the meaning ) in 1 John 4:10 look at how absurd if reads.​

​

This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to appease our angry god , to appease His anger, to appease his angry self etc.......for our sins.​

​

But you mistranslated 1 John 4:10 because here is the proper translation:

​

In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the offering to satisfy the angry, offended Father for our sins.​

(1 John 4:10)​

​

So, Father in Heaven is loving and angry about sin. This is part of the Gospel of Christ! This is not your absurd! This is a blessing!!!

Do you believe that God loves the sinner but hates the sin?

The Word of God is Truth (John 14:6).

In Christ,
Kermos

pure nonsense, unbiblical to the core. I gave the correct translation of the word, not the pagan mid evil meaning you espouse.

you are all over the map with your reply, stick to the topic.

next fallacy

G2435 ἱλαστήριον hilasterion hil-as-tay’-ree-on
from a derivative of G2433; n n;
AV-propitiation 1, mercyseat 1; 2
1) relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation
1a) used of the cover of the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies, which was sprinkled with the blood of the expiatory victim on the annual day of atonement (this rite signifying that the life of the people, the loss of which they had merited by their sins, was offered to God in the blood as the life of the victim, and that God by this ceremony was appeased and their sins expiated); hence the lid of expiation, the propitiatory
1b) an expiatory sacrifice
1c) an expiatory victim

Since G2435 comes from G2433 we should look at that word:

2433 ἱλάσκομαι hilaskomai hil-as’-kom-ahee
middle voice from the same as 2436; v;
AV-be merciful 1, make reconciliation 1; 2
1) to render one’s self, to appease, conciliate to one’s self
1a) to become propitious, be placated or appeased
1b) to be propitious, be gracious, be merciful
2) to expiate, make propitiation for

There is only one other verse that uses “hilasterion” (G2435):

“And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; (G2435) of which we cannot now speak particularly.” (Heb 9:5)

That verse suggests that “hilasterion” is a place where mercy is given – quite different from the usual meaning of propitiation.

So, if that word had been used in Romans 3:25, would that give the verse a different meaning?

“Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation mercy seat …”

It literally means “a place or means of reconciliation, a place where atonement or unity and at-one-ment takes place.”

The only two verses that use “hilaskomai” (G2433) are:

“And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful (G2433) to me a sinner.” (Luke 18:13)

“Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for (G2433) the sins of the people.” (Heb 2:17)

Those verses do not suggest anything like propitiation. What are the effects of the translation of a word meaning mercy seat as propitiation? They can’t be good.

Where did the Concept of Propitiation Come From?

Many (if not all) pagan cultures embrace the concept of propitiation and appeasement. Here is another example of modern misunderstanding:

“… Propitiation is an ancient word, which we as Christians have in common with other world religions. To propitiate a god is to offer a sacrifice that turns aside the god’s wrath. Anyone who believes in a god knows that they need some way to stay on the friendly side of that god. So they give gifts to the god, or serve in the temple, or give alms. And if the god is angry with them, they pay a price, or make a sacrifice, or find some way to soothe the god’s anger: they propitiate him.”(https://maney.us/blog/2014/03/25/trevin-wax-pagan-propitiation-vs-biblical-propitiation/)

Do we really need a way to stay on the friendly side of God? What about “God is love”?

Here are verses using “propitiation” (in the KJV):

“God presented Jesus as the way and the means of restoration. Now, through the trust established by the evidence of God’s character revealed when Christ died, we may partake of the Remedy procured by Christ. God did this to demonstrate that he is right and good — because in his forbearance he suspended, for a time, the ultimate consequence of us being out of harmony with his design for life — yet he has been falsely accused of being unfair. 26 He did it to demonstrate at the present time how right and good he is, so that he would also be seen as being right when he heals those who trust in Jesus.” (Rom 3:25-26, )

“This is what real love is: It is not that we have loved God, or that we have done something to get him to love us, but that he loved us so much that he sent his Son to become the Remedy and cure for the infection of sin and selfishness so that through him we might be restored into perfect unity with God.” (1 John 4:10, ) https://characterofgod.org/propitiation-definition/

hope this helps !!!

 

[Kermos]

pure nonsense, unbiblical to the core. I gave the correct translation of the word, not the pagan mid evil meaning you espouse.

you are all over the map with your reply, stick to the topic.

next fallacy

G2435 ἱλαστήριον hilasterion hil-as-tay’-ree-on
from a derivative of G2433; n n;
AV-propitiation 1, mercyseat 1; 2
1) relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation
1a) used of the cover of the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies, which was sprinkled with the blood of the expiatory victim on the annual day of atonement (this rite signifying that the life of the people, the loss of which they had merited by their sins, was offered to God in the blood as the life of the victim, and that God by this ceremony was appeased and their sins expiated); hence the lid of expiation, the propitiatory
1b) an expiatory sacrifice
1c) an expiatory victim

Since G2435 comes from G2433 we should look at that word:

2433 ἱλάσκομαι hilaskomai hil-as’-kom-ahee
middle voice from the same as 2436; v;
AV-be merciful 1, make reconciliation 1; 2
1) to render one’s self, to appease, conciliate to one’s self
1a) to become propitious, be placated or appeased
1b) to be propitious, be gracious, be merciful
2) to expiate, make propitiation for

There is only one other verse that uses “hilasterion” (G2435):

“And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; (G2435) of which we cannot now speak particularly.” (Heb 9:5)

That verse suggests that “hilasterion” is a place where mercy is given – quite different from the usual meaning of propitiation.

So, if that word had been used in Romans 3:25, would that give the verse a different meaning?

“Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation mercy seat …”

It literally means “a place or means of reconciliation, a place where atonement or unity and at-one-ment takes place.”

The only two verses that use “hilaskomai” (G2433) are:

“And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful (G2433) to me a sinner.” (Luke 18:13)

“Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for (G2433) the sins of the people.” (Heb 2:17)

Those verses do not suggest anything like propitiation. What are the effects of the translation of a word meaning mercy seat as propitiation? They can’t be good.

Where did the Concept of Propitiation Come From?

Many (if not all) pagan cultures embrace the concept of propitiation and appeasement. Here is another example of modern misunderstanding:

“… Propitiation is an ancient word, which we as Christians have in common with other world religions. To propitiate a god is to offer a sacrifice that turns aside the god’s wrath. Anyone who believes in a god knows that they need some way to stay on the friendly side of that god. So they give gifts to the god, or serve in the temple, or give alms. And if the god is angry with them, they pay a price, or make a sacrifice, or find some way to soothe the god’s anger: they propitiate him.”(https://maney.us/blog/2014/03/25/trevin-wax-pagan-propitiation-vs-biblical-propitiation/)

Do we really need a way to stay on the friendly side of God? What about “God is love”?

Here are verses using “propitiation” (in the KJV):

“God presented Jesus as the way and the means of restoration. Now, through the trust established by the evidence of God’s character revealed when Christ died, we may partake of the Remedy procured by Christ. God did this to demonstrate that he is right and good — because in his forbearance he suspended, for a time, the ultimate consequence of us being out of harmony with his design for life — yet he has been falsely accused of being unfair. 26 He did it to demonstrate at the present time how right and good he is, so that he would also be seen as being right when he heals those who trust in Jesus.” (Rom 3:25-26, )

“This is what real love is: It is not that we have loved God, or that we have done something to get him to love us, but that he loved us so much that he sent his Son to become the Remedy and cure for the infection of sin and selfishness so that through him we might be restored into perfect unity with God.” (1 John 4:10, ) https://characterofgod.org/propitiation-definition/

hope this helps !!!

Your post doesn't include the definition for ἱλασμός (hilasmos - Strong's Greek: 2434 - Propitiation, Atoning Sacrifice) which is the word translated to the noun phrase atoning sacrifice in the beautiful He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world
(1 John 2:2).

You believe that Christ's atonement applies to everybody everywhere in all time (the whole world) which means that you believe Christ atoned for people in hell. See the opening post in this thread.

I believe that Christ's atonement applies to only the people whom Christ chooses (the whole world) which means I believe Christ atoned exclusively to people Christ places in the Kingdom of Heaven.

He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world
(1 John 2:2)

you did not choose Me, but I chose you
(John 15:16)

I chose you out of the world
(John 15:19, includes atonement)
​

All the other passages and definitions which you posted do not change that you still have people like Nancy of the whole world who died and goes to hell having Christ's atonement because you hold to the whole world as being everyone everywhere in all time in 1 John 2:2, so you cling to Christ's failure atonement (see the opening post).