Rob Bell
- Thread starter zone
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A
I would have never thought to bother going against limited atonement since
i know God will only save those who believe the gospel. And id have never
used 1 cor 15. But here recently seeing how limited atonement folks torture
certain verses i just couldnt help it.
Although im nearly a cessationists i dont like how cessationist teachers use
scripture for that either.
The worst part of my experience lately Tribesman is the sentimental driven
exegesis. In otherwords using the Faith movement or universalism or whatever
as an excuse or reason to force an opinion on the text, along with the sour and moody disposition
almost always when debating it. Or the denial of Gods foreknowledge making it such
a limited definition, when the words do not contain the limited definition.
Im not even sure ill ever debate it again, never wanted to in the first place.
And even if i converted it sure isnt going to be from the theological performance
ive seen here lately, which has mostly been drive bys, and high fives from the comrades.
Ive never seen so much attitude forced into exegesis as of lately.
i know God will only save those who believe the gospel. And id have never
used 1 cor 15. But here recently seeing how limited atonement folks torture
certain verses i just couldnt help it.
Although im nearly a cessationists i dont like how cessationist teachers use
scripture for that either.
The worst part of my experience lately Tribesman is the sentimental driven
exegesis. In otherwords using the Faith movement or universalism or whatever
as an excuse or reason to force an opinion on the text, along with the sour and moody disposition
almost always when debating it. Or the denial of Gods foreknowledge making it such
a limited definition, when the words do not contain the limited definition.
Im not even sure ill ever debate it again, never wanted to in the first place.
And even if i converted it sure isnt going to be from the theological performance
ive seen here lately, which has mostly been drive bys, and high fives from the comrades.
Ive never seen so much attitude forced into exegesis as of lately.
Get you and agree up to a point here. I think I yet also see some trace of what you supposedly criticise in this your very own post. Hope you receive it the right way.
I wasn't using 1Cor.15:22 to stray off-topic to Limited atonement, just got reminded of how similar universalists and non-universalist universal atonement advocates are reasoning with that one particular verse (speaking of forced exegesis, eh). From the "L" point of view that verse can not have that problem with it, but the universalist will have to make much force to press whole mankind, believers or not, into Christ and the non-universalist universal atonement advocate will have to say that the atonement didn't actually accomplish and secure the salvation of a single soul, it is just universally potential to save all men, if they contribute with their ability to accept it. The consequence of such thinking is obvious and much discussed elsewhere.
I have to say that the universalist position is more consequent, as they do hold to a view of the atonement as actually accomplished (paid for, in full) for literally all men. However, this is not scriptural. There is a limit: in Christ.
I wasn't using 1Cor.15:22 to stray off-topic to Limited atonement, just got reminded of how similar universalists and non-universalist universal atonement advocates are reasoning with that one particular verse (speaking of forced exegesis, eh). From the "L" point of view that verse can not have that problem with it, but the universalist will have to make much force to press whole mankind, believers or not, into Christ and the non-universalist universal atonement advocate will have to say that the atonement didn't actually accomplish and secure the salvation of a single soul, it is just universally potential to save all men, if they contribute with their ability to accept it. The consequence of such thinking is obvious and much discussed elsewhere.
I have to say that the universalist position is more consequent, as they do hold to a view of the atonement as actually accomplished (paid for, in full) for literally all men. However, this is not scriptural. There is a limit: in Christ.
A
I agree. And by the way. Ive never been around reformed folks till just lately. Im not gona
let them turn me off either, im still open. But as yet i think i could do a far better arguement
for their cause. Its just that there are to many parts left over. Im still behind on my homework.
Still want to make a list of texts that surely show limited atonement then a list of the leftover parts.
Then see how they can harmonize. If not then ill just have to stay a heretic.
Alot of my library is made up of reformed believers going back hundreds of years and
never seen the tension ive seen here lately. Pink being by far the teacher ive read the most.
Just mainly because he makes the best proof of what he taught right or wrong.
let them turn me off either, im still open. But as yet i think i could do a far better arguement
for their cause. Its just that there are to many parts left over. Im still behind on my homework.
Still want to make a list of texts that surely show limited atonement then a list of the leftover parts.
Then see how they can harmonize. If not then ill just have to stay a heretic.
Alot of my library is made up of reformed believers going back hundreds of years and
never seen the tension ive seen here lately. Pink being by far the teacher ive read the most.
Just mainly because he makes the best proof of what he taught right or wrong.
Last edited: