Why Calvinist Cannot Defend Their Doctrine of a Limited Atonement

[Robert Pate]

OK. Can you please answer my question contained in that to which you are responding in the above:

"It appears the root of your disagreement is that in the "hearing" being done you assume a person possesses the ability to "hear" the Good News prior to be so enabled to posses the ability to hear by the Holy Spirit. All such discussions inevitably wind up at this point. One group sees themselves as able to choose wisely, the other group sees no one able to choose wisely until being made able by the Holy Spirit. So are you of the opinion that since only one of these groups can be correct, assuming all other essentials of the faith are not in dispute, that this means the other group is lost, hell-bound, and sin-bent?"

AMR

Everyone has the ability to hear and believe the Gospel.

Since Christ tasted death for everyone, Hebrews 2:9, Then everyone can hear the Gospel, believe and be saved.

Since God so loves the world that he gave his only begotten Son, John 3:16. Then the whole world can hear, believe and be saved.

Since Jesus is the savior of the whole world, John 12:47, then the whole world can hear and believe the Gospel and be saved.

To teach anything else is to teach that Jesus is NOT Lord.

 

[Brother Ducky]

You say that you are saved, but there is something missing in your doctrine, The "Historical Gospel" of Jesus Christ. You don't believe it.
No one is going to be saved without Faith in Christ and his Gospel.

Oh, you silly goose. Of course I have faith in Christ and his Gospel. As do many here. Reformed, non-Reformed, etc.

 

[Nanja]

We are quickened by hearing and believing the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

In the Old Testament they were quickened by believing in God's promise of a savior

No difference in how anyone is saved OT or NT.
All of God's Election of Grace 2 Tim. 1:9 are quickened by the Spirit!


A spiritually dead person has no ability to hear Prov. 20:12 the Gospel which is Spiritual.

First God quickens / makes Spiritually Alive, then hearing and believing follow.

Eph 2:8-9!

~~~~~

 

[beloved57]

nanja

No difference in how anyone is saved OT or NT.
All of God's Election of Grace 2 Tim. 1:9 are quickened by the Spirit!

Amen !

A spiritually dead person has no ability to hear Prov. 20:12 the Gospel which is Spiritual.

Yes, One must be of God to hear Gods Words or they hear them not, spiritually Jn 8:47

First God quickens / makes Spiritually Alive, then hearing and believing follow.

Yes, that's logical, activity flows out of having life !

 

[Robert Pate]

No difference in how anyone is saved OT or NT.
All of God's Election of Grace 2 Tim. 1:9 are quickened by the Spirit!


A spiritually dead person has no ability to hear Prov. 20:12 the Gospel which is Spiritual.

First God quickens / makes Spiritually Alive, then hearing and believing follow.

Eph 2:8-9!

~~~~~

Just as you limit the atonement, you also limit God's mercy, justice and righteousness.

If God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, then God also made a way for all to be saved.

 

[beloved57]

Just as you limit the atonement, you also limit God's mercy, justice and righteousness.

If God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, then God also made a way for all to be saved.

You make God unjust, punishing the Righteous, them made so by the obedience of Christ Rom 5:19 !

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Everyone has the ability to hear and believe the Gospel.

Since Christ tasted death for everyone, Hebrews 2:9, Then everyone can hear the Gospel, believe and be saved.

Since God so loves the world that he gave his only begotten Son, John 3:16. Then the whole world can hear, believe and be saved.

Since Jesus is the savior of the whole world, John 12:47, then the whole world can hear and believe the Gospel and be saved.

To teach anything else is to teach that Jesus is NOT Lord.

So I take it your round about response to my simple question can be summed up as "Yes". Sigh.

I am of the opinion that those that differ as to soteriological synergism and monergism, while maintaining all the essentials of the faith, are my brothers and my sisters in the Lord. While I believe that such differences with my own view by others do lead to very different walks of faith and deprive one of the full measures of grace, I am loathe to declare someone I consider confused about the matter as on their merry way to eternal perdition.

AMR

 

[glorydaz]

So I take it your round about response to my simple question can be summed up as "Yes". Sigh.

I am of the opinion that those that differ as to soteriological synergism and monergism, while maintaining all the essentials of the faith, are my brothers and my sisters in the Lord. While I believe that such differences with my own view by others do lead to very different walks of faith and deprive one of the full measures of grace, I am loathe to declare someone I consider confused about the matter as on their merry way to eternal perdition.

AMR

:thumb:

 

[beloved57]

So I take it your round about response to my simple question can be summed up as "Yes". Sigh.

I am of the opinion that those that differ as to soteriological synergism and monergism, while maintaining all the essentials of the faith, are my brothers and my sisters in the Lord. While I believe that such differences with my own view by others do lead to very different walks of faith and deprive one of the full measures of grace, I am loathe to declare someone I consider confused about the matter as on their merry way to eternal perdition.

AMR

Thats called compromising the Truth, synergism denies Salvation by Grace, thats an Essential Doctrine of the Faith !

 

[Bright Raven]

Thats called compromising the Truth, synergism denies Salvation by Grace, thats an Essential Doctrine of the Faith !

You deny the testimony of AMR?

 

[Robert Pate]

So I take it your round about response to my simple question can be summed up as "Yes". Sigh.

I am of the opinion that those that differ as to soteriological synergism and monergism, while maintaining all the essentials of the faith, are my brothers and my sisters in the Lord. While I believe that such differences with my own view by others do lead to very different walks of faith and deprive one of the full measures of grace, I am loathe to declare someone I consider confused about the matter as on their merry way to eternal perdition.

AMR

The "Historical Gospel" of Jesus Christ is the basis for the Christians faith. Not Calvinism, Catholicism or any other ism.

If one does not have faith in the work and the person of Jesus Christ by believing that he has defeated sin, death and the devil and that he is the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, is in jeopardy of being lost.

The Holy Spirit is given to the Christian to bring him into the truth, John 14:26. If you do not believe in the basics of Christianity you may not have the Holy Spirit.

The biggest problem with Calvinism is that they do not believe that Jesus has provided salvation for the whole world. This is a red flag. no one will be saved that does not believe that Jesus has atoned for the sins of the whole world, simply because they do not believe that Jesus is Lord. No faith in Christ, means no salvation. A limited atonement is a declaration that one is lost.

 

[Nanja]

Thats called compromising the Truth, synergism denies Salvation by Grace, thats an Essential Doctrine of the Faith !

I concur.

~~~~~

 

[beloved57]

I concur.

~~~~~

Amen !

 

[beloved57]

The "Historical Gospel" of Jesus Christ is the basis for the Christians faith. Not Calvinism, Catholicism or any other ism.

If one does not have faith in the work and the person of Jesus Christ by believing that he has defeated sin, death and the devil and is that he is the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, is in jeopardy of being lost.

The Holy Spirit is given to the Christian to bring him into the truth, John 14:26. If you do not believe in the basics of Christianity you may not have the Holy Spirit.

The biggest problem with Calvinism is that they do not believe that Jesus has provided salvation for the whole world. This is a red flag. no one will be saved that does not believe that Jesus has atoned for the sins of the whole world, simply because they do not believe that Jesus is Lord. No faith in Christ, means no salvation. A limited atonement is a declaration that one is lost.

Calvinism, TULIP is the Gospel, which you reject !

 

[Bright Raven]

The atoning sacrifice of Jesus is for the whole world even if not accepted. To say less is to deny the scriptures. God is love and wishes no man to perish. He gave his son for the sin of the world that men may return unto him.

 

[Robert Pate]

The atoning sacrifice of Jesus is for the whole world even if not accepted. To say less is to deny the scriptures. God is love and wishes no man to perish. He gave his son for the sin of the world that men may return unto him.

A denial of that is a denial that "Jesus is Lord".

No one will be saved that denies the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Calvinism, TULIP is the Gospel, which you reject !

That's a good thing.

 

[Robert Pate]

That's a good thing.

I confess that I reject TULIP.

A limited atonement means that Jesus is NOT Lord.

No one will be saved that does not believe that Jesus has victoriously defeated sin, death and the devil and that he is Lord.

 

[Robert Pate]

This has been a good thread. Many have responded to it. Because of this I hate to see it go by the way side. Much more needs to be said about Calvinism. The way I see it Calvinism is anti-Gospel, anti-faith, anti-Christ, anti-Bible and anti-God. Those who have embraced this false doctrine do not have the Holy Spirit.

You cannot say that Jesus only made a limited atonement and be saved. It is a denial of the Gospel and the Lordship of Jesus Christ. If Jesus has not atoned for the sins of the whole world, 1 John 2:2, then Jesus is not Lord and should be removed from his position at the right hand of God.

 

[Shasta]

So I take it your round about response to my simple question can be summed up as "Yes". Sigh.

I am of the opinion that those that differ as to soteriological synergism and monergism, while maintaining all the essentials of the faith, are my brothers and my sisters in the Lord. While I believe that such differences with my own view by others do lead to very different walks of faith and deprive one of the full measures of grace, I am loathe to declare someone I consider confused about the matter as on their merry way to eternal perdition.

AMR

I agree. I fellowship with people who believe in monergism as well a synergism. The points at which we divide should only be the essential truths that are expressed by such creeds as the Apostle's Creed and the Nicene Creed. To me they embody the essential DNA of the seed of truth.

I too have noticed the tendency on the part of many who on the basis of a certain disagreement declare the other party to be an antichrist. I have been considered to be a legalist by some and an antinomian by others whereas I do not ascribe to either view. Someone recently called me a "viper" because I did not believe in sinless perfectionism.

I am not inclined to tell another poster what their eternal destiny is either. Of course there are some real heretics around here as well as unbelievers but it does neither of them any good for me to tell them they are going to hell...unless that happens to be the focus of the discussion.

I think people are not used to encountering Christians irl who are not in 100% agreement with them. Thus it may strike them as intolerable when they see people interpreting the word differently online. Since the voice of dissent are faceless names on the screen it is easy to demonize them.