According to Paul, Christ’s atonement is “greater” than the sin of Adam that infected the entire world.
So, the point here is that Christ is the Lamb that takes away the sin of the “whole world.” This doesn’t mean that the entire world is saved because not all believe. However, the point of the atonement is that Christ’s blood is greater than sin itself. Not just your sins or my sins, but all sin. The power of sin and death itself was conquered by the blood of Christ.
Out of time, I’ll respond to the rest later.
So, the point here is that Christ is the Lamb that takes away the sin of the “whole world.” This doesn’t mean that the entire world is saved because not all believe. However, the point of the atonement is that Christ’s blood is greater than sin itself. Not just your sins or my sins, but all sin. The power of sin and death itself was conquered by the blood of Christ.
Out of time, I’ll respond to the rest later.
You Non-Reformed folks are totally oblivious to your hypocrisy. You guys have no qualms appealing to other scriptures, which is what Mr. Chaps implicitly did regarding the general unbelief of the world, to unwittingly make the point that the 'whole world" in Jn 1:29 is at the end of the day really and truly is used in a limited, conditional sense because the "whole world" is really talking only about those who do have faith! IOW, Christ takes away the sin of the "whole world" on the CONDITION that the "whole world" believes in Him. And by definition "conditions" determine limits or set limitations. They restrict or modify So when you NR guys do this, you unwittingly wander into the Reformed camp because Reformed folks understand from the git go that the "whole world" is used in a limited sense due to the context of the entire bible. But when we Reformed appeal to other texts outside the immediate context any any given passage, you NR fellas usually go bonkers and cry "FOUL" on us!
But even what I just stated is not the bottom line either because "world" or "whole world" always means EACH and EVERY person in it to the vast majority of NR professing Christians. So, what Jn 1:29 is really saying according to NR traditions is that [literally] Christ takes away the sin of the EACH and EVERY Person (i.e. the "world" or "whole world"). But this can't be, according Mr. Chaps explanation. How could Christ literally take away the sin of each and every person, while simultaneously not [literally] taking away the sin of each and every person in the same sense and at the same time? We clearly have a violation of the Law of Noncontradiction. Bottom line: In order for the term "world" to be consistently used in the unlimited, universal, distributive sense, there can be NO CONDITIONS (limits) imposed upon the term", as you NR folks must do in order to avoid the more flagrant and obvious heresy of Universal Salvation.
And for your info, Mr. Chaps, Reformed folks believe that Christ's shed blood -- his atoning work is infinitely greater than all sin in the qualitative sense, but not in the quantitative sense since it was never God's intention to save the entire world. When God "came down" to "rescue" his chosen, covenant people (Abraham's descendants) from Egypt, did he rescue the Egyptians, with whom He had no covenant relationship, as well?
Or in the Garden after the Fall, did God rescue (save) Adam, as he did Eve? God reconciled Eve to himself by decreeing that enmity be placed between her and her seed and the seed of the Serpent. Her seed was the godly seed from whom the Ultimate Seed (Christ) would descend to crush the head of the Serpent. Since Adam did not descend from Eve and was not included in God's decree in Gen 3:15, this can only mean that God condemned him.