What does "limited atonement" mean?
- Thread starter Elin
- 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
But all salvation is individual, based on individual faith.
The faith of the individuals in my group won't save me unless I also have saving faith, individually.
Always glad to help when I can!
Sounds like you are an observer of humanity.
The faith of the individuals in my group won't save me unless I also have saving faith, individually.
Always glad to help when I can!
Sounds like you are an observer of humanity.
I think i need to go to work and get some rest now
keep it up friend.
E
yeah Abiding.
I used an OT passage which spoke of a particular place and a particular event, And she asked why people who were not there at that place were not saved from being bitten by a the snakes who happened to be there and expected me to give her an answer. she does not even understand the question she asked makes no sense.
especially since God did save MANY gentiles in the OT based on the future death of Christ, which that symbol stood to represent.
I used an OT passage which spoke of a particular place and a particular event, And she asked why people who were not there at that place were not saved from being bitten by a the snakes who happened to be there and expected me to give her an answer. she does not even understand the question she asked makes no sense.
especially since God did save MANY gentiles in the OT based on the future death of Christ, which that symbol stood to represent.
The subject is unjustice,
and the difference under discussion is between the "injustice" of God unconditionally electing some and not all,
and man making the decisive choice to believe, making God "just" in sending them to hell.
My point is to show that removing unconditional election does not make God more just,
because he still creates those whom he knows will choose to go to hell, when he could save them fron hell by just not creating them at all.
How do the actual facts of creation in omniscience make him more loving?
They don't. You still have to reckon with God's sovereign choice, either in election or in creation.
and the difference under discussion is between the "injustice" of God unconditionally electing some and not all,
and man making the decisive choice to believe, making God "just" in sending them to hell.
My point is to show that removing unconditional election does not make God more just,
because he still creates those whom he knows will choose to go to hell, when he could save them fron hell by just not creating them at all.
How do the actual facts of creation in omniscience make him more loving?
They don't. You still have to reckon with God's sovereign choice, either in election or in creation.
Last edited:
A
I read you say...." better yet, who forced them to look at it?" "that is called faith"
Faith is not a force unless yer a charismatic anyway i just must have
misunderstood you....we can talk about that later. faith made lot not look back
his wife had her heart set on sin. boom. No force was in play either way.
Just an act of the will.
Faith is not a force unless yer a charismatic
anyway i just must havemisunderstood you....we can talk about that later. faith made lot not look back
his wife had her heart set on sin. boom. No force was in play either way.
Just an act of the will.
sorry. the formatting makes it hard....
okay...
i don't understand what you are saying above.
i suppose, if i am hearing you right, you're saying people are calling on the Name of the Lord without knowing who He is (without Him calling them first - drawing)?
again, don't know what you mean "That was not acts 3:9"
okay....but what about the Lord calling them to Himself?
could you show where that fits? because it's also in there.
Who calls first...and who was he calling (through peter's preaching)?
"when they heard this"
who was there hearing the sermon? that's what i mean.
why were those specific people there at that time to hear the message that it was prophesied they were to hear?
Jesus had already blinded the Pharisees - He cursed them.
so they didn't hear. the permanent residents of Jerusalem were the mockers....they were the ones who mocked and didn't hear. not any non-israelites from
and where were all the gentiles around the world at that time?
Paul said they were lost, without hope and God.
no Gospel, no Temple, no knowing the Lord of Creation, nothing.
pagan idolators.
so what i am asking is, you said Romans 9 was not about individual salvation.
but we see in Acts it very specifically was. prophesied to a NATION first, and individuals received the word and were saved.
again i'll ask...what were those specific people doing in that very location on that day to hear that sermon and be saved?
who called them? how did they come to be in that location?
and that itself was prophesied in Genesis, we now know.
that the serpent cult from Babylon would be in place to conspire with Romans to put Jesus to death.
i know the Gospel (the Spirit's speaking whether through peter at that time, or through the Scriptures to us today IS the Power unto salvation.) that's not the question for me.
what i am wondering about the calling is....what about all the ppl who were not called from gentile nations before Pentecost?
did they have a chance to call on the name of the Lord? they didn't know the Lord. they surely didn't know His Name.
i don't know....what do you think?
(please understand, if we can, between you and i mike .....i do not want to make this about when regeneration in the sequence of salvation takes place, if possible...okay? that's not really going to help me get to what i'm wondering. at this point i'm wondering about CALLING in general - nationally as we see does happen, then individually. )
i may be way off topic.
i'll have to assess it.
from the beginning?
Ephesians 2
11Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands— 12remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
ephsians 2 says clearly that the gentiles were far off and without hope, and did not have God.
and it says that they were brought near.
again, this is saying that they (as a multitude...i don't mean proselytes and strangers who were included in the commonwealth) could not have come until God's Time said so.
doesn't it? isn't that what it is saying?
okay...
i don't understand what you are saying above.
i suppose, if i am hearing you right, you're saying people are calling on the Name of the Lord without knowing who He is (without Him calling them first - drawing)?
again, don't know what you mean "That was not acts 3:9"
okay....but what about the Lord calling them to Himself?
could you show where that fits? because it's also in there.
Who calls first...and who was he calling (through peter's preaching)?
"when they heard this"
who was there hearing the sermon? that's what i mean.
why were those specific people there at that time to hear the message that it was prophesied they were to hear?
Jesus had already blinded the Pharisees - He cursed them.
so they didn't hear. the permanent residents of Jerusalem were the mockers....they were the ones who mocked and didn't hear. not any non-israelites from
and where were all the gentiles around the world at that time?
Paul said they were lost, without hope and God.
no Gospel, no Temple, no knowing the Lord of Creation, nothing.
pagan idolators.
so what i am asking is, you said Romans 9 was not about individual salvation.
but we see in Acts it very specifically was. prophesied to a NATION first, and individuals received the word and were saved.
again i'll ask...what were those specific people doing in that very location on that day to hear that sermon and be saved?
who called them?
how did they come to be in that location?and that itself was prophesied in Genesis, we now know.
that the serpent cult from Babylon would be in place to conspire with Romans to put Jesus to death.
i know the Gospel (the Spirit's speaking whether through peter at that time, or through the Scriptures to us today IS the Power unto salvation.) that's not the question for me.
what i am wondering about the calling is....what about all the ppl who were not called from gentile nations before Pentecost?
did they have a chance to call on the name of the Lord? they didn't know the Lord. they surely didn't know His Name.
i don't know....what do you think?
(please understand, if we can, between you and i mike .....i do not want to make this about when regeneration in the sequence of salvation takes place, if possible...okay? that's not really going to help me get to what i'm wondering. at this point i'm wondering about CALLING in general - nationally as we see does happen, then individually. )
i may be way off topic.
i'll have to assess it.
from the beginning?
Ephesians 2
11Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands— 12remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
ephsians 2 says clearly that the gentiles were far off and without hope, and did not have God.
and it says that they were brought near.
again, this is saying that they (as a multitude...i don't mean proselytes and strangers who were included in the commonwealth) could not have come until God's Time said so.
doesn't it? isn't that what it is saying?
I read you say...." better yet, who forced them to look at it?" "that is called faith"
Faith is not a force unless yer a charismatic anyway i just must have
misunderstood you....we can talk about that later. faith made lot not look back
his wife had her heart set on sin. boom. No force was in play either way.
Just an act of the will.
Faith is not a force unless yer a charismatic
anyway i just must havemisunderstood you....we can talk about that later. faith made lot not look back
his wife had her heart set on sin. boom. No force was in play either way.
Just an act of the will.
could you please be more careful mike?
i didn't say that:
Originally Posted by eternally-gratefull
they like to live on symbols
Moses held the serpent up high, and said if you look at it, you will live, do not you will die
Many died.. why? if it was so easy that all we had to do is look.. Who forced them to not look at the serpant? better yet, who forced them to look at it?
this is called faith..
and this is the core of the issue.
for me anyhow, at this time.
God's choices.
maybe posting on His choice of Israel above other nations, through whom He would bring The Seed is my approach for a time.
even a look at The Lord's genealogy (if nothing else) shows He Himself made precise, absolute choices.
because that's in there also.
for us to say this kind of choice is not like individual choice is guesswork as far as i can see.
but i reckon it's time for me to look at what you have on man's responsiblity Elin.
i'm looking back at this, since i must have made a decision at some point, but i sure don't remember it.
for me anyhow, at this time.
God's choices.
maybe posting on His choice of Israel above other nations, through whom He would bring The Seed is my approach for a time.
even a look at The Lord's genealogy (if nothing else) shows He Himself made precise, absolute choices.
because that's in there also.
for us to say this kind of choice is not like individual choice is guesswork as far as i can see.
but i reckon it's time for me to look at what you have on man's responsiblity Elin.
i'm looking back at this, since i must have made a decision at some point, but i sure don't remember it.
E
yep. the wisdom of his plan. PURE love
you keep forgetting what satans lie was against him. How do you prove a liar is a liar? by doing exactly what he claims is the lie, and proving he is the one who is the liar.
Satans lie was many
1. God just wants us to do what he wills. and not think for our self.
2. God does what he does and does not care for anyone. or for only select people
3. God is a dictator. who has you on his leash and forces you to do whatever he wills.
Christ did that by showing his perfect love, and having satan himself nail the hands and feet of Christ to the cross..
If God just randomly picks and choses condemned people to be saved, yet has the power to save everyone and does not offer them salvation also. His plan backfired. Satan is seen as showing truth. God wants people to do what he does not allow them to think for themself. He forces people to do what he wills. like a dog on a leash, and he only cares for a select group of people (those ho chooses)
which is exactly what satan said about him in the first place.
The only lipstick is you taking what I said and erasing most of it, and pasting something else to make it look like I said something else.
You have not discussed scripture much have you? You do not do things like this., and expect people to come to your side of the table to agree with you.. what you do is alienate people so they would not want to believe you, even if they agreed with you.
God did make absolute choices as to the genealogy of his Son, he knew the line that he wanted his Son to come from and he insured that Jesus came from the tribe of Judah, the royal line of David but I venture to say that choosing a blood line is different from one receiving salvation.
Israel was God's chosen elect and that is why salvation through Christ was made available to them [Jew] first but they (note: some did believe) chose not to believe in Jesus as the Messiah. Now being that being the case . .why didn't all Jews believe since they were the chosen, the elect? When we read Hebrews 11. . .What is the "witness"?
By faith Noah prepared an ark . . .
By faith Abraham was called to go out into a place which he should after receive an inheritance, obeyed and By faith Abraham offered up Isaac . . .
Through faith Sara received strength to conceive see, she judged him faithful who had promised. . .
Would Noah have been saved from the flood if he had not chosen to obey? Would Abraham received an inheritance or been imputed righteousness had he not chosen to obey? Would Sara have conceived had she not chosen to obey the one she judged faithful? They each acted on the trust and faith in God to be faithful to what he promised.
I don't know if I am making any sense. . .sometimes it's hard to get across what is in your heart to say
Israel was God's chosen elect and that is why salvation through Christ was made available to them [Jew] first but they (note: some did believe) chose not to believe in Jesus as the Messiah. Now being that being the case . .why didn't all Jews believe since they were the chosen, the elect? When we read Hebrews 11. . .What is the "witness"?
By faith Noah prepared an ark . . .
By faith Abraham was called to go out into a place which he should after receive an inheritance, obeyed and By faith Abraham offered up Isaac . . .
Through faith Sara received strength to conceive see, she judged him faithful who had promised. . .
Would Noah have been saved from the flood if he had not chosen to obey? Would Abraham received an inheritance or been imputed righteousness had he not chosen to obey? Would Sara have conceived had she not chosen to obey the one she judged faithful? They each acted on the trust and faith in God to be faithful to what he promised.
I don't know if I am making any sense. . .sometimes it's hard to get across what is in your heart to say
Good job, here, Mike.
But. . . those elected in the NT are elected only to salvation.
Whereas in the OT, election of Israel meant to God's purpose, it did not mean to salvation.
In Rom, Paul is discussing the OT election of Israel to God's purpose, not to salvation.
But you are applying it to the meaning of NT election, which is only to salvation.
So you're saying that understanding the overriding theme then makes it a place to glean doctrine about salvation?
And so it is the place to glean doctrine regarding the meaning of God's sovereignty in all election,
whether it is OT election to God's purpose, or NT election to salvation.
But all those whom God hardens in Ro are hardened to belief in Jesus Christ and are, therefore, damned because of their unbelief.
Well, "cut off" means unbelieving Israel has been cut off from the one olive tree of God's people,
which is the NT church of believing Jews and Gentiles.
The church is those who are in Christ.
Therefore, unbelieving Israel is not in Christ, and all those outside Christ at their death are damned.
That means unbelieving Israel is not, and has not been, saved for two millennia now.
That's a lot o' folks who have not been saved.
I think I do.
The context is belief and unbelief, and Israel's rejection and cutting off because of unbelief.
Unbelieving Israel is cut off from the one olive tree of God's people, which is the NT church, the body of Christ.
And there is no salvation outside the body of Christ.
But Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, etc., etc., etc. were not cut off because of unbelief.
Every Israelite did not, and has not, experienced hardening and cutting off from salvation by God.
Only a partial number have been cut off since the time of Christ.
A minority has been, and is being, saved.
Well Ro 9 is about the sovereignty of God in OT election to his purpose.
And that shows the meaning of God's sovereignty in NT election to salvation.
And then Ro 11 treats of unbelieving Israel's cutting off from the one olive tree of God's people, which is the NT church of believing Jews and Gentiles, and the body of Christ outside which there is no salvation.
But. . . those elected in the NT are elected only to salvation.
Whereas in the OT, election of Israel meant to God's purpose, it did not mean to salvation.
In Rom, Paul is discussing the OT election of Israel to God's purpose, not to salvation.
But you are applying it to the meaning of NT election, which is only to salvation.
So you're saying that understanding the overriding theme then makes it a place to glean doctrine about salvation?
And so it is the place to glean doctrine regarding the meaning of God's sovereignty in all election,
whether it is OT election to God's purpose, or NT election to salvation.
But all those whom God hardens in Ro are hardened to belief in Jesus Christ and are, therefore, damned because of their unbelief.
Well, "cut off" means unbelieving Israel has been cut off from the one olive tree of God's people,
which is the NT church of believing Jews and Gentiles.
The church is those who are in Christ.
Therefore, unbelieving Israel is not in Christ, and all those outside Christ at their death are damned.
That means unbelieving Israel is not, and has not been, saved for two millennia now.
That's a lot o' folks who have not been saved.
I think I do.
The context is belief and unbelief, and Israel's rejection and cutting off because of unbelief.
Unbelieving Israel is cut off from the one olive tree of God's people, which is the NT church, the body of Christ.
And there is no salvation outside the body of Christ.
But Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, etc., etc., etc. were not cut off because of unbelief.
Every Israelite did not, and has not, experienced hardening and cutting off from salvation by God.
Only a partial number have been cut off since the time of Christ.
A minority has been, and is being, saved.
Well Ro 9 is about the sovereignty of God in OT election to his purpose.
And that shows the meaning of God's sovereignty in NT election to salvation.
And then Ro 11 treats of unbelieving Israel's cutting off from the one olive tree of God's people, which is the NT church of believing Jews and Gentiles, and the body of Christ outside which there is no salvation.