Atwood,
Cassian the homework is yours; I do not do it for you. You have to prove your arguments, not I. Realize that we don't bow down to your denomination superiority.
I know you don't bow down to the authority of the Gospel. Christ/the Holy Spirit and His Church. You have been making that abundantly clear with all the man devised theories you hold. You seem to gravitate to them.
[quote[Did you not say that everyone is raise to an incorruptible body? That sounds like universalism. Why don't you just deny universalism?[/quote] Even after three explanations, texts/scripture, you still are in a fog. Not difficult to understand considering what you have posted in this thread.
Scripture says Christ will raise all the dead, to immortal and incorruptible bodies. I know this is difficult for you since you only believe is limited atonement while denying the Incarnation of Christ. But you see, Christ became man, just as we are, took upon Himself our very same nature, and raised that nature to life. I suppose I should give you the texts again, beginning with all men were condemned to death first, Gen 3:19, Rom 5:12, and then the solution to death, which is life, Rom 5:18, it will be for all men, Rom 11:32, I Cor 15:12-22, Heb 2:14-17, Heb 2:9, II Tim 1:10. He also redeemed the world from death as well, II Cor 5:18-19, Rom 3:23-25, Col 1:20. He will raise these human beings, those He created in His Image and each and every single human being will stand before Him and be judged with they did with the Gift of salvation and His offer to be reunited with Him.
System of theology is not bad. By having a system that means that we try to put it all together in a coherent fashion, comparing scripture with scripture (not using human religious tradition as the authority).
which is just what you are doing. You have relied upon your own intellectual wit, along with such men as Calvin, Anselm, Augustine and Darby to name just some of the views you hold. All man made traditions, How come, why not believe the Gospel of Christ, as He gave it, has preserved it as He promised. For all your boasting about believing in Christ, you have created a secular, philosophical one that has been demoted to a mere historical figure.
Now it is obvious in reading the Bible that there are salvific passages that apply to the whole race of Adam, as "God so loved the world" and John 2:2 propitiation for everyone's sins. It is also obvious that everyone is not saved nor gets eternal life; some go to the Lake of Fire. Belief is required on man's part (& nothing else). So the question is how to reconcile unlimited atonement passages with the fact that those who go to Heaven are limited.
therein lies your error. These are two separate events. The salvation from death and sin is a gift given to all men. Man has nothing to do with it. However, the purpose of that gift was to make it possible for man and God to again be reunited in a working relationship as God intended when He created man. All men of necessity must be saved from death and sin otherwise there is no one to occupy heaven or hell. I know your theology denies the real fall, but Satan took man captive through the power of death. Man was to die, to return to dust, cease to exist, no eternal existence. How does dust get to stand before Christ and be judged? Surely not in some limited atonement concept. It is all or nothing. I Cor 15:12-22 makes this so abundantly clear it seems impossible anyone could ever believe in such a thing as limited atonement.
One way of reconciling the passages is the error of Calvinistic denial of unlimited atonement. Such Calvinists may try to explain away the unlimited verses, as claiming that "God so loved the world" means the world of the elect.
Yes, I know very well. Which categorically denies who Christ is and what He accomplished. It puts Christ as a good teacher, a mere historical figure who can do absolutely nothing is saving the world. John 4:42.
Another error is universalism. Since the Lord paid for all men's sins, then the result is that all go to Heaven; no one goes to Hell. This is an extreme & erroneous form of eternal security BTW, one held apparently by many "church fathers."
another gross error of Anshelm and Original sin theorists. Atonement DOES NOT MEAN FORGIVENESS. I know of only one Church Father who believed in Universalism which was Origin. He also believed in the immortality of the soul not being a created soul.
As I suspected you do not understand the doctrine of Universalism either. They believe in hell also.
They used the term, recapitulation, universal recapitulation. This is NOT universalism. It is precisely what scripture teaches, if you want to use the term, universal redemption that would be very scriptural.
J.O. Buswell (Systematic Theology) thinks that this formula solves the conflict:
1) Christ's death made sufficient payment for all men's sins, but
2) Christ's death is efficient in paying only for the sins of the elect.
He misses scripture completely. He makes the same error and does not understand the fall, nor Christ's work to reverse the fall. The ONLY solution to Calvinism is to abandon it. It cannot be aligned with scripture in any form.
My solution is that while Christ paid for all men's sins, belief is required on the part of man to receive that benefit.
God so loved the world . . . that whosoever believes.
that again may be what you believe but hardly scriptural. Christ did not PAY for man's sins. He atoned for sin. It means He provided the means, namely the sacrifice, in order to forgive sins. Sins not forgiven are held by man and they will suffer the consequences which is eternal death, the second death. God loved the world and saved the world from death and sin. There will be a new world, heaven and earth because it was redeemed, it was taken back from Satan.
Your theory is obtuse to me and makes no sense. Is this your denominational line? And you do not quote scripture and argue from it, thus it goes nowhere. I am very familiar with scripture, and your POV smells like strange incense.
What you have proved is you are familiar with Calvin's interpretation of scripture, along with Augustines false theory of Original Sin, and Anselms false theory of Satisfaction theory of Atonement. Along with the fact that Calvin added the penal concept to Anselm's theory. You are well verses in man made theories, that is for sure.
You continue to attack me personally for ignorance of scripture and/or theology. Then if I recite some of my education, you say you don't care about it.
I have attacked your theology. You can believe whatever you like. But to say Calvinism is what scripture means is far from Truth that was given in the beginning.
Now come clean with us Cassian:
1) How many times have you read the Bible through?
2) Have you done as I have, read it through & marked all the salvation passages (including ones your opponents claim)?
3) Do you even care what the Bible itself says? Or are you so committed to your denominational line, that you cannot consider scripture on its own merits?
I am very committed to Christ's Gospel, as it was given in the beginning. I truly believe that Christ and the Holy Spirit have keept their word and preserved both the Body of Christ in this world, and the Gospel entrusted to it. unchanged for 2000 years. It is quite obvious you hold to a lot of man made theories that cannot be found in scripture as it was originally given and preserved. You can read the Bible a hundred times through, I don't think it will help you a bit when you read it through the prism of Calvinism. Your blinders are huge.
I think that you are parroting a denominational line, and only refer to scripture as convenient in debating Biblicists.
I am parroting the Gospel of Christ, what He originally gave and has preserved. The Gospel on which scripture is based and was given to His Body, the Church by the Apostles. It has been preserved in that Body for 2000 years unchanged. It is the same Gospel that has been proclaimed by the Church for 2000 years. Man has not been able to impose his interpretations upon it.
This is unlike the sola scripturist who extract the text from its full content, and from its true context and then in isolating it begin to extract ideas from it as if the Bible where a source of ideas and formulas. In this attempt they have created hundreds of gospels all according to their name and garnered a few followers. You have very amply exemplified such a practice. Creating hundreds of sectarian gospels is man in his egoistic, arrogant form making himself an authority over a text and devising his own plan of salvation to his liking.
Let me remind the readers:
John 6:37
All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.
John 10:28
I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.
Thou shalt call Him Jesus,
for He shall save His people from their sins.
and nothing of this quote has to do with eternal security. Isolate texts and man can make them say anything and everything they desire. How could thousands of variations of a single text even come about except through the hands of men who want to impose their own authority over a text.
No matter how you try, Atwood, you cannot change history, the Gospel of Christ as He gave it.
