The Issue of Limited Atonement

Why are you not able to understand? Can you read?

In your view the murder of God's Son came from Him.

No, prove because something is determined by God it came from Him. We're waiting
the false doctrine came from Calvin whom I quoted and RC, Piper, MacAuther and Grudem all espouse the heresy of the Father killed/murdering His own Son.

Some Trinity eh ?

No it's straight out of PAGANISM- the doctrines of demons.

It's why PSA is untenable. The false doctrine of the Fathers wrath on His Son- Its anti God, Antichrist, anti Bible, anti Tri-Unity.

hope this helps !!!
 
All those false teachers are projecting their pagan mythological beliefs onto God. The mythology and fables of Calvinism is what I call it.
True. Mythological stories like Zeus portrays a very petty character with nothing in him or about him that one could say he has a kind morally good noble character. The picture that Calvinists have of God is that he's similar to Zeus motivated to action by a character that has all the weak and selfish frailties of men. Not the God of the Bible
 
That is where the doctrine of the wrath bearing Son leads to in its logical conclusion in PSA. They fit together like a hand in glove.
Well for sure we can see Calvin believed that for he states it in his actually quote. Again one shouldn't even be considered qualified to teach any Bible subject if one actually believes that.
 
Well for sure we can see Calvin believed that for he states it in his actually quote. Again one shouldn't even be considered qualified to teach any Bible subject if one actually believes that.
Agreed !

It should send out giant RED FLAGS immediately .
 
Why are you not able to understand? Can you read?

In your view the murder of God's Son came from Him.

No, prove because something is determined by God it came from Him. We're waiting
That is absurd if he planned, determined something of course it was from it

Only bald denial and an unwillingness to see the obvious could lead someone to deny it
 
True. Mythological stories like Zeus portrays a very petty character with nothing in him or about him that one could say he has a kind morally good noble character. The picture that Calvinists have of God is that he's similar to Zeus motivated to action by a character that has all the weak and selfish frailties of men. Not the God of the Bible
Calvinists have also imposed the mannerisms of Thor onto their god. Thor is a distant god who zaps people with his powerful bolts. In like manner, their god zaps them with regeneration and belief.
 
the false doctrine came from Calvin whom I quoted and RC, Piper, MacAuther and Grudem all espouse the heresy of the Father killed/murdering His own Son.

Some Trinity eh ?

No it's straight out of PAGANISM- the doctrines of demons.

It's why PSA is untenable. The false doctrine of the Fathers wrath on His Son- Its anti God, Antichrist, anti Bible, anti Tri-Unity.

hope this helps !!!
Was Christ murdered by those who killed Him?

We have posted verses where the wrath of the Father is poured on the Son and you ignored them.
 
That is absurd if he planned, determined something of course it was from it

Only bald denial and an unwillingness to see the obvious could lead someone to deny it
Prove your premise.

If God determined the murder of His own Son then it's from Him.

Were all waiting with abated breath to prove your premise. We both know you can't and won't. Its deflect and divert mode for the Provisionist
 
Was Christ murdered by those who killed Him?

We have posted verses where the wrath of the Father is poured on the Son and you ignored them.
NEVER ONCE in all the BIBLE does it ever say Gods WRATH fell on the Son.

Quote it.

you must have added another book to your bible , we have 66 and its not anywhere to be found.

oops

next

I'll get the popcorn ready while you look for the invisible verse. :)

hope this helps !!!
 
So Calvinists believe that the Father actually hated Jesus? If that be the case I'd say such a one saying such isn't qualified really to teach any scripture at all from the Bible.
No but he did suffer his wrath

Again, how would he have freed us from the wrath of God, if he had not transferred it from us to himself? Thus, “he was wounded for our transgressions,” (Isa. 53:5,) and had to deal with God as an angry judge. This is the foolishness of the cross, (1 Cor. 1:18,) and the admiration of angels, (1 Pet. 1:12,) which not only exceeds, but swallows up, all the wisdom of the world.

John Calvin and William Pringle, Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010), 92.

According to Calvin God the son suffered the wrath of God the father

and there correspondingly is introduced a separation in the Godhead
 
NEVER ONCE in all the BIBLE does it ever say Gods WRATH fell on the Son.

Quote it.

you must have added another book to your bible , we have 66 and its not in their anywhere.

oops

next

I'll get the popcorn ready while you look for the invisible verse. :)

hope this helps !!!
Those are quotes from their fabled Elect Standard Version Bible.
 
Prove your premise.

If God determined the murder of His own Son then it's from Him.

Were all waiting with abated breath to prove your premise. We both know you can't and won't. Its deflect and divert mode for the Provisionist
Its logically intuitive

Only desperation could drive one to deny it

How can you plan something take steps to bring it to pass, and it not be from you.
 
Its logically intuitive

Only desperation could drive one to deny it

How can you plan something take steps to bring it to pass, and it not be from you.
yet their same logic above used they run from when it comes to sin and evil- just more contradictions.
 
NEVER ONCE in all the BIBLE does it ever say Gods WRATH fell on the Son.

Quote it.

you must have added another book to your bible , we have 66 and its not anywhere to be found.

oops

next

I'll get the popcorn ready while you look for the invisible verse. :)

hope this helps !!!
Read Isiah 53 and get back to us. That's alot of suffering for someone who did no wrong. Why did He suffer those things?

Easy on the popcorn.
 
Read Isiah 53 and get back to us. That's alot of suffering for someone who did no wrong. Why did He suffer those things?

Easy on the popcorn.
Here I will help you out . :)

Within the study of the doctrine on PSA, the central O.T. passage it comes from is found in Isaiah 53. Let us look at how the N.T. quotes Isaiah 53 and see how the N.T. writers viewed the passages and used them in the N.T. and what language from Isaiah 53 they applied to Jesus in the N.T. regarding suffering.

In doing so, a few things stand out. There is no penal aspect/ language Isaiah used that is carried over in the N.T. but that of substitution. Isaiah 53:4- WE (not God) considered Him punished by God. The following NT passages quote Isaiah 53: Matthew 8:14-17; Mark 15:27-32; John 12:37-41; Luke 22:35-38; Acts 8:26-35; Romans 10:11-21; and 1 Peter 2:19-25. Not one of them uses any penal language where PSA gets its doctrine from.

At best PSA is a doctrine based upon an argument from silence in the New Testament.

The N.T. does not use the penal language that was developed during the Reformation in the dark ages as that was how that culture during that time had dealt with people in their judicial system punishing those who disagreed with them, torture and death were a result for many who went against their theology. That was the mentality of those who developed the doctrine we have today called the PSA atonement.

There are many aspects and theories of the atonement that contain truth, and no one theory is 100% correct. There are many different views and aspects to the atonement within orthodoxy. 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. Jesus said: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The reason my Father loves Me is that I lay down My life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord” (John 10:11; 17-18). Or again, while speaking to the multitudes, Jesus declared: “Whatever the Father does the Son also does” (John 5:19). And Jesus said: “Now my heart is troubled. ‘Father, save me from this hour?’ No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. Father, glorify your name!” (John 12:27-28)

The clear picture that emerges from Scripture is that Jesus was not the unfortunate victim of the angry Father. Rather, the Father and the Son were working in concert through the cross to pay for the sins of humanity and make atonement. There is no division of will between the Father and the Son. Jesus’ atonement was done in love which provided covering and forgiveness of sins as He declared was a ransom.

And this view harmonizes with God’s wrath that is still yet to come and was not poured out on Jesus on the cross. Our loving God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:11). Our loving Father took pleasure to bruise His Son to reconcile us to God as an offering for our sins. (Isaiah 53:10).

It is by faith in the Son through the message of the gospel that saves and unbelief which condemns. The gospel is for all mankind, all the world, for everyone. God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:4). God is the Savior of all men, especially of believers (1 Timothy. 4:10), For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to everyone (Titus 2:11) For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all (Romans 11:32). The Lord is not slow in keeping His promise as some understand slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish but everyone to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9).

God sent His Son into the world to take away the sin of the world (John 1:29) and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2). and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again (2 Corinthians 5:15). 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. (Hebrews 2:9)

The sin issue !

Sin is the transgression of the law- 1 John 3:4. Sin is known thorough/by the law- Romans 7:7. The law is a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ- Galatians 3:24-25. Where there is no law there is no transgression of the law- Romans 4:14. Sin is not counted against anyone when there is no law. Romans 5:13.

In Colossians 2:13-15 we read the following: When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

Ephesians 2:14-15: For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.

2 Corinthians 5:18-20: All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 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. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.

So, we see from the above scriptures it’s not sin per se that keeps the sinner from God it is unbelief. Faith is the issue. In Romans 5:1-2 we read the following: Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God

Its unbelief that keeps one from salvation and places them under condemnation. This is taught throughout the N.T. gospels and epistles. Here we see what Jesus and Paul declared below.

John 3:18: Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

John 3:36: Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them

Romans 11:20: Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith.

Hebrews 3:19: So, we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief. Cf Heb 4:6- unbelief

Jesus said: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The reason my Father loves Me is that I lay down My life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord” (John 10:11; 17-18).

Or again, while speaking to the multitudes, Jesus declared: “Whatever the Father does the Son also does” (John 5:19). And Jesus said: “Now my heart is troubled. ‘Father, save me from this hour?’ No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. Father, glorify your name!” (John 12:27-28)

The clear picture that emerges from Scripture is that Jesus was not the unfortunate victim of the angry Father receiving His anger, wrath, vengeance or retribution.

Rather, the Father and the Son were working in concert through the cross to pay for the sins of humanity and make atonement. There is no division of will between the Father and the Son. They remained in perfect unity, harmony, oneness of purpose, fellowship while making atonement for sin a reality and the forgiveness of that sin through His death, burial and resurrection from the dead.

hope this helps !!!
 
Here I will help you out . :)

Within the study of the doctrine on PSA, the central O.T. passage it comes from is found in Isaiah 53. Let us look at how the N.T. quotes Isaiah 53 and see how the N.T. writers viewed the passages and used them in the N.T. and what language from Isaiah 53 they applied to Jesus in the N.T. regarding suffering.

In doing so, a few things stand out. There is no penal aspect/ language Isaiah used that is carried over in the N.T. but that of substitution. Isaiah 53:4- WE (not God) considered Him punished by God. The following NT passages quote Isaiah 53: Matthew 8:14-17; Mark 15:27-32; John 12:37-41; Luke 22:35-38; Acts 8:26-35; Romans 10:11-21; and 1 Peter 2:19-25. Not one of them uses any penal language where PSA gets its doctrine from.

At best PSA is a doctrine based upon an argument from silence in the New Testament.

hope this helps !!!
Still waiting on what Isiah 53 is exactly.

Let's see, he was smitten by God. What's that mean?

Crushed by the Lord? What's that mean

Suffering servant? Suffering what exactly?
 
Still waiting on what Isiah 53 is exactly.
your questions are diversions. I completely demolished your position in my last post. you have never studied the topic whereas I have in depth for years/decades.

you are incapable of defending your false doctrine of PSA. You are just parroting what you have been taught to believe- spoon fed. You have not owned the doctrine since you cannot defend it. I defended it for years as a Calvinist so I know the position well. I can run circles around you defending PSA and tulip. :). It's just the plain fact.

next
 
your questions are diversions. I completely demolished your position in my last post. you have never studied the topic whereas I have in depth for years/decades.

you are incapable of defending your false doctrine of PSA. You are just parroting what you have been taught to believe- spoon fed. You have not owned the doctrine since you cannot defend it. I defended it for years as a Calvinist so I know the position well. I can run circles around you defending PSA and tulip. :). It's just the plain fact.

next
Mr answers does not have any and refuses to address the text.

Start running champ, you have catching up to do.
 
Back
Top Bottom