Limited atonement !

[KingJ]

Christs death for someone isn't motivated by ethnicity. Thats a corrupt notion

The passage you quoted speaks to Jews not gentiles. With this post, you are now creating a rabbit trail and not dealing with the point made.

 

[Brightfame52]

The passage you quoted speaks to Jews not gentiles. With this post, you are now creating a rabbit trail and not dealing with the point made.

Christs death for someone isn't motivated by ethnicity. Thats a corrupt notion

 

[B-A-C]

Christs death for someone isn't motivated by ethnicity. Thats a corrupt notion

No more corrupt than saying God favors some people over others.

 

[Brightfame52]

No more corrupt than saying God favors some people over others.

Its way more corrupt and it charges God with respect of persons based on the flesh.

 

[Rhema]

There is a called people that Christ came specifically to taste death for, and bring them into their eternal inheritance. In the original its they which are " the called" with the definite article.

What scripture uses a definite article?


No article here (the King James added in words. So naughty of them.)

Rom 1:6 εν οις εστε και υμεις κλητοι ιησου χριστου​

And no article here either (if one uses the correct word order)

Rom 8:28 οιδαμεν δε οτι τοις αγαπωσιν τον θεον παντα συνεργει εις αγαθον τοις κατα προθεσιν κλητοις ουσιν​

(Geneva) Also we knowe that all thinges worke together for the best vnto them that loue God, euen to them that are called of his purpose.​

​

(Bishops) For we knowe yt all thinges worke for the best, vnto them that loue God, to them which also are called of purpose.​

​

(Young's Literal) And we have known that to those loving God all things do work together for good, to those who are called according to purpose;​

​

(NRSV) We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose.​

So this "substantive object," this "THE Called" is just your own linguistic construct. (But maybe I missed a verse, so ... what scripture uses a definite article?)

You entitled to your opinion

No.

No one is entitled to an opinion.

One is entitled to an informed opinion, and no one is entitled to mess up the language.

Rhema

 

[Brightfame52]

@Rhema

What scripture uses a definite article?

Please pay attention Heb 9:15

15And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο διαθήκης καινῆς μεσίτης ἐστίν, ὅπως θανάτου γενομένου εἰς ἀπολύτρωσιν τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πρώτῃ διαθήκῃ παραβάσεων τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν λάβωσιν οἱ κεκλημένοι τῆς αἰωνίου κληρονομίας

The called here are the heirs of salvation
Heb 1:14

14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?
Heb 6:17

17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:

And as you can see in Heb 9:15" they receive it by means of death, so Christs death is limited to the Heirs, when they are redeemed, they are called.

 

[KingJ]

Its way more corrupt and it charges God with respect of persons based on the flesh.

I truly like the fact that you do not want to incriminate God as a respecter of persons. This is a truth that one does not immediately grasp, God reveals it to us as He did to Peter in Acts 10:34 ''Of a truth I perceive, God is no respecter of persons''.

Now you just need to grasp that limited atonement to a specially selected number is being a respecter of persons.

It is a simple equation.

1. God is the creator of all.
2. God is all knowing.
3. God specially created some among many to be His chosen elect. There is nothing you can do to be one of the elect if you are not chosen from birth.

1 + 2 + 3 = Partiality / favoritism = respecter of persons

The truth is:

1. God is the creator of all.
2. God is all knowing.
3. God chooses to be as good as He is great (1 & 2) and truly gives the invitation to the 'whomsoever' will. True free will. He even lays His own life down on the cross to show how seriously He takes a relationship with His creation.

1 + 2 + 3 = No respecter of persons.

This is how the prophets that knew God better than you or I defined Him:

1 John 1:5 God is light with no darkness in Him at all
Psalm 145:17 God is righteous in all His ways.
Job 34:12 It is unthinkable that God would do what is evil or pervert justice.

 

[Brightfame52]

Christ death wasn't for all mankind, but for those whom He perfected forever who were the sanctified. Heb 10:14

14 For by one offering[His death] he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

These are the ones God the Father chose in Christ before the foundation and so they were sanctified in Him Eph 1:4

4 according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

Jude 1:1

Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called

Furthermore Christs death/offering of Himself for them, sanctified them Heb 10:10

10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Because His death took away our sins ! Now can this be said of all mankind ? Can this be said of the world of the reprobate which is condemned ? 1 Cor 11:32

32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.

Were they ever sanctified by God the Father or by the death of Christ ? I say God forbid, No

 

[Brightfame52]

@KingJ

Now you just need to grasp that limited atonement to a specially selected number is being a respecter of persons.

No its not, its grace Rom 11:5-7

5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

You must think God is indebted to save all by Grace, that's corrupt thinking and denies Grace

 

[KingJ]

@KingJ

No its not, its grace Rom 11:5-7

5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

You must think God is indebted to save all by Grace, that's corrupt thinking and denies Grace

I don't know how to say this nicely, but you are failing at 1 + 1 sum here.

Let's say God shows you in a dream that YOU ARE NOT one of His chosen ones and there is absolutely NOTHING you can do to be one. How would you feel about that?

Please ANSWER the question. NO DODGING.

 

[Brightfame52]

I don't know how to say this nicely, but you are failing at 1 + 1 sum here.

Let's say God shows you in a dream that YOU ARE NOT one of His chosen ones and there is absolutely NOTHING you can do to be one. How would you feel about that?

Please ANSWER the question. NO DODGING.

lol You have failed Grace.

 

[KingJ]

lol You have failed Grace.

Answer the question....

If grace is for you and not me, how is it not God being a respecter of persons?

YOU ARE EVADING. You are 100% guilty of being a false teacher right now. 100%!!!!!

Just FYI, false teachers go to hell! Sleep on that fact.

 

[Curtis]

2Th 2:10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

Who are these people who will wind up in hell who could have been "saved" if they had received the love of the truth that they could be saved?

Would Jesus’s blood had covered their sins?

 

[Brightfame52]

Answer the question....

If grace is for you and not me, how is it not God being a respecter of persons?

YOU ARE EVADING. You are 100% guilty of being a false teacher right now. 100%!!!!!

Just FYI, false teachers go to hell! Sleep on that fact.

You have failed Grace.

 

[KingJ]

You have failed Grace.

Well, we are not discussing grace. We are discussing partiality.

 

[Brightfame52]

How 2 Cor 5:19 teaches limited atonement !​

Its no secret that mans religion appeals to 2 Cor 5:19 as a proof text that the scripture teaches that Christ died for all men without exception, for it reads:

To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

The carnal religionist sees the word world here and automatically and carelessly assumes that it means everyone without exception. However the word world here is defined in a limited sense in that it does means:

kósmos (literally, "something ordered") – properly, an "ordered system" (like the universe, creation); the world.

an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, or der.

any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort

Any divinely ordered collection of particulars in the divine scheme of things is a World !

The word particulars is defined:

of or relating to a single or specific person, thing,group, class, occasion, etc., rather than to others or all; special rather than general:

Now with this in mind, the world of 2 Cor 5:19 is particular in that none of its citizens have their sins imputed to them, which is plainly stated of them here:

"God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them"


Which Act of God constitutes this World as a forgiven world, because we read in another place the consequence of non imputation of sin by God is this:

Rom 4:7-8

7Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.

8Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

That world of particular individuals in 2 Cor 5:19 is a forgiven world whose sins are covered, and God will not charge them with their sins, not ever !

Now we know this cant apply to all without exception because there are individuals God will remember their sins against them, so they are still being charged with them, here Rev 18:4-5

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.5For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.

Now these who shall have their sins remembered by God, cannot be of the World of 2 Cor 5:19, which means and confirms that the World in that scripture supports limited atonement, the reconciled world is limited to certain particulars !

 

[Rhema]

Please pay attention Heb 9:15

15And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Thank you for pointing this out, but... (Isn't there always a but?)

But, "called" is a participle (using the verbal action as a noun), and as such I'm surprised it isn't rendered "calling" like it should be. The verse is talking about the calling, not the called. That said, I had hoped to have a better translation for you by now (with explanation), but that verse has some very odd grammar, and since it's not a verse that I've translated recently, it will take me some time to find out why current renderings are skewed. (Hey, I might even learn I'm wrong... but...)

It's looking something like "that they might understand the calling of the promise of eternal inheritance" but like I said, there's some weird word order going on. The NRSV just swapped the two Greek phrases around and stuffed in some connecting words to make it sound coherent.

Kindly,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

That world of particular individuals

Nope, once again the word "reconciling" is a noun and κόσμος just means Order. And I don't find "reconciling" to be a good gloss for καταλλάσσω, but rather, CHANGING. Jesus was ORDER CHANGING. Or Rather, God in Christ was Order Changing to Himself (from something else) not imputing to them their trespasses and putting in us the LOGOS of the Change.

 

[Brightfame52]

Thank you for pointing this out, but... (Isn't there always a but?)

But, "called" is a participle (using the verbal action as a noun), and as such I'm surprised it isn't rendered "calling" like it should be. The verse is talking about the calling, not the called. That said, I had hoped to have a better translation for you by now (with explanation), but that verse has some very odd grammar, and since it's not a verse that I've translated recently, it will take me some time to find out why current renderings are skewed. (Hey, I might even learn I'm wrong... but...)

It's looking something like "that they might understand the calling of the promise of eternal inheritance" but like I said, there's some weird word order going on. The NRSV just swapped the two Greek phrases around and stuffed in some connecting words to make it sound coherent.

Kindly,
Rhema

You sound confusing friend

 

[Brightfame52]

Nope, once again the word "reconciling" is a noun and κόσμος just means Order. And I don't find "reconciling" to be a good gloss for καταλλάσσω, but rather, CHANGING. Jesus was ORDER CHANGING. Or Rather, God in Christ was Order Changing to Himself (from something else) not imputing to them their trespasses and putting in us the LOGOS of the Change.

That world of particular individuals