Limited Atonement | Ep. 73
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 เม.ย. 2023
- In this episode of the G3 Podcast, Josh Buice, Virgil Walker, and Scott Aniol discuss the doctrine of Limited Atonement, including common misconceptions and caricatures of the argument.
MENTIONED IN THE PODCAST
2023 G3 National Conference:
g3min.org/events/g3-2023-the-...
2023 G3 Pre-Conferences:
g3min.org/events/gbts-christi...
g3min.org/events/gracious-cou...
G3 Biblical Worship Workshops
g3min.org/events/g3-biblical-...
CONNECT WITH US
Support G3 Ministries:
g3min.org/give/
G3 Ministries:
g3min.org
Facebook:
/ g3conference
Twitter:
/ g3conference
Instagram:
/ g3conference
That the atonement exists at all leaves me in awe. It's hard for me to wrap my head around the "Why did he chose me" answer. Just praise His Holy Name for the sacrifice Christ made for me.
Just watched this. Great discussion! I never tire of hearing the truth of limited atonement and God’s sovereignty.
"Calvinism does not have-and never has had-five points.
Rather, it has five answers to the five errors of Arminianism."
W. Robert Godfrey
Thank you for this discussion
Great podcast. Thank you gentlemen
Excellent explanation. TY
Love your podcasts. Very informative
The blood and the grace of Christ is not limited. You'll never convince me otherwise
But if the blood applies to everyone, then how is everyone not in heaven. It's the complete sovereign work of God that anyone is in Heaven. If you believe that it's not anything that we do to get salvation, then you must believe God is completely sovereign. The blood of Jesus only applies to those who repent and are given faith in Jesus Christ making his atonement actually fully work for those it was paid for.
@@owenyoumans5597 Jesus clearly asked us (in the Gospels) to believe in Him who God the Father sent. That means we have a choice. Some people will say yes, some people will say no. Otherwise God Himself is picking winners and losers...and Scripture says He has no partially and desires all to be saved. So yeah the blood applies...to those who say yes to Christ...and to those who say no it doesn't. Just like Judas who rejected Jesus. Just like the thief on the cross who asked Jesus.
@@spacecoastz4026 Here is the thing though, we agree that God is the ONLY one who will be doing the saving so we don't do anything for salvation. God is fully sovereign over salvation so ultimately we don't have a choice over that. God will, in the end, save people and not save others according to his will. The people who are saved wouldn't have played a role in salvation because God gave them the gift of faith in Jesus Christ and repentance of their sins. The ones that aren't saved are the ones that are ultimately not given that gift. The interesting thing about this whole topic is that we'll never know who all is saved so we won't know everyone that the blood applies to but we do know that it is for the ones that repent and have faith in Jesus Christ, two gifts given by the almighty holy God.
@@owenyoumans5597 I don't agree with what you are saying because I don't see that in Scripture...rather I see the opposite. If we have zero choice to either choose and accept Christ...or we don't, then there is no point in spreading the Gospel, there is no point in reading the Word, and there is no point in Scripture...because we have no choice.
Yes, God does the saving...God paid the price, but that doesn't remove my freewill from the decision.
And so we do have a choice...and John 6 is a good example. The thief on the cross is a good example, etc.
Scripture says:
20 Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God.
When I funded out for the Grace of God the limited atormenta atonement, I feel free and grateful that God is in totally control to who He is saved. God is justice, He is giving justice to some and He is giving Grace others. Nothing I can do to be save, this is a work of the Holly Spirit through the Bible. Thank God for the reform doctrine.
I listened this morning and really appreciate you all putting forth your positions. I've learned a lot from Vergil and Darryl, and love it every time Virgil is on Whitlock's show. His articles have helped me a lot as a charismatic refuge trying to learn sound doctrine in a big Eva SBC church. I just don't know the other two hosts well, but when Virgil didn't hold back against BLM and MLK, I knew he was "a real one" and "an authentic fellow".
I was studying John 3 a few months ago and heard a bunch of pastors telling people that the word world didn't mean everyone in the world, and at first it concerned me. I have some family members that are and caught up in Jehovah's witness doctrine, and they try to change words and change scripture make it fit their understanding. The world argument sounded like that to me at first, so I did some more digging and learned about the arguments and counter arguments for limited atonement. Mike Winger had a good series on it, too, where someone countered his points, then he responded to those counter arguments. Sometimes I don't appreciate Mike's videos, but this was a good series.
Here are just a few of the things he was talking about.
1 John 2:2 is redundant if "world" means "just us saints". It says He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
1 John 2:2 ESV
But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
2 Peter 2:1 ESV
The master that bought them is Jesus, but they were still able to deny him.
I don't believe it means that God failed on Calvary because people rebelled and refused to submit. That's what happened in the garden, too. But I can also see how that's the only logical conclusion if there's a presupposition among Calvinists that people can't choose to faith (verb) and live in belief of God and choose to follow him, without God selecting them and making them do that.
I think my favorite thing about this video that you all made, is how you explained that it doesn't stop you from evangelizing and living out the great commission. That's been my biggest concern about people that believe in limited atonement, that they won't evangelize or they'll be snooty about it. So thanks for ending the video with how you all still carry out the great commission. I'd be interested in learning more about what hyper Calvinism is. If believing in limited atonement isn't hyper, then what is?
Thanks again,
Bernie
If you don't mind, I want to address 1 John 2:2 and 2 Peter 2:1. In 1 John 2:2, many emphasize defining "the whole world" as meaning everyone who ever lived instead of understanding the context of that phrase in light of the whole verse. The word propitiation is the important word in this verse. That word means appeasement or satisfaction. Jesus Christ is the appeasement or satisfaction for "our" sins, meaning the believer. This means we will not be judged by God when we die and stand before Him because Christ satisfied the wrath of God on the cross. If this word propitiation is the definite appeasement for the believer, then it would also have to be for "the whole world," but that can't be true or everyone would be saved and no one would face the punishment of Revelation 20:11-15. In light of the word propitiation, the term whole world means mankind as a whole, not just the Jews since John, Peter, and James addressed Jewish believers (though the truths of their epistles stand for all believers). John uses the word "world" in different contexts of all his writings, and sometimes it means the unsaved world in contrast to believers or it means those in an ethnic group outside of Israel.
2 Peter 2 is all about the condemnation of false teachers in the church. In verse 1 it makes clear that they are false teachers that bring in destructive heresies, so we know they're not saved. When Peter says the deny the Master that bought them; this isn't referring to being bought unto salvation. If it were, they wouldn't be condemned (Romans 8:1). This expression indicates how destructive they are. They claim to be believers and teachers, yet the very Lord and Savior they affirm "bought" them, they deny with their actions and teachings. Peter is demonstrating how insane that is by mocking them. You see John use similar language in 1 John when he basically writes that if you're a true Christian, then you wouldn't do the things you do because it shows that the love of the Father is not in you and you lie. A false teacher will claim their bought by the blood of Christ, yet do and say everything contrary to sound doctrine and the leading of the Holy Spirit, therefore you can rightly sarcastically mock their assertion by saying the deny the Lord that bought them to show that they're truly not bought.
I hope this helps. God bless.
@@2timothy23 @2timothy23 Thanks for replying. I really appreciate it. I reread a few times, and I don't follow the logical track you laid out that says if Jesus was the propitiation for the sin of the world, then it would've had to save the whole world. It's leaving out part of the equation, that a person has to respond in repentance and believe to be saved. If they don't repent and believe, it doesn't work for them. I can have a cookout tomorrow for the entire world to come and eat (unlimited atonement), but if you don't show up and grab a plate you aren't getting any of my brisket. Only the people that showed up and grabbed a plate can get any (limited application). Is that a valid option for the gospel? If not, why not?
9:18 The Doctrine of Election
2 Timothy 1:9-10
“…if we will know the free mercy of our God in saving us, we must come to His everlasting counsel: whereby He chose us before the world began. For there we see, He had no regard to our persons, neither to our worthiness, nor to any deserts that we could possibly bring. Before we were born, we were enrolled in His register; He had already adopted us for His children. Therefore let us yield the whole to His mercy, knowing that we cannot boast of ourselves, unless we rob Him of the honor which belongs to Him." John Calvin
♥️🙏🏿
Good evening brothers... Since I hit on your channel I simply cannot let you... What an amazing session of teaching I listened to today on the doctrine of Limited Atonement.
Praise be to YAH..
I am from Namibia... Thete is this one thing I wish to know on the term... Lord's Day. Is it the weekly first day of the week being Sunday church service?
23:07 I only fear God has saved no greater wretch than I (me& David Brainerd)
11:00. Buice hit the nail on the head. Owen does put the issue to rest in the death of death in the death of Christ as Aniol says soon after.
Matthew 7: 13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, AND THERE ARE FEW WHO FIND IT.
The L in T.U.L.P. Stands for “Limited Atonement” it is a Mistranslation from Dutch to English. Dutch is the original linguist in which the 5 articles of the Contra Remonstrant were written. It was a response on the 5 articles of the remonstrant written in 1610 by the Arminian Uittenbogaard . He wrote the 5 articles that the synod of Dordrecht 1618 - 1619 opposed to. There were 62 Dutch delegates, and 27 foreign delegates representing eight countries.
The word which Uittenbogaard used means: “Particular Atonement” and Christ Died particularly for every person of the whole world. Which is borderline to universal redemption. The Synod upheld the Sufficiency of the dead Of Christ for the whole World and if it was for 1000 worlds, but opposed the idea of Particular redemption for every person ever born. At the time that this controversy on the Synod of Dodrecht Calvin had already Died in 1564, and had nothing to do with it.
The true meaning of limited attonement is stated in these articles that were written and put together by the delegates of the Synod to explain the Atonement Of Christ.
2-3. This death of the Son of God is the only and perfect sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; of infinite power and dignity, abundantly sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world.
2-4. And this death is therefore of such great power and dignity, because the person who suffered it is not only a truly and utterly holy man, but also the only begotten Son of God, of one eternal and infinite being with the Father and the Holy Ones. Spirit, such as our Savior must be. Moreover, because his death has been attended with the sense of the wrath of God and of the curse which we have deserved by our sins.
2-5. Furthermore, the promise of the gospel is, that whosoever believeth on Christ crucified shall not perish, but have eternal life; which promise to all nations and men, to whom God, according to his good pleasure, sends his gospel, must be proclaimed and presented indiscriminately, with a commandment of repentance and faith.
2-6. But that many, being called by the gospel, repent not, neither believe in Christ, but perish in unbelief, this is not for want or insufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ offered on the cross, but through their own unbelief.
COMMENTARIES OF JOHN CALVIN ON THE BIBLE.
“He makes this favor common to all, because it is propounded to all, and not because it is in reality extended to all; for though Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world, and is offered through God’s benignity indiscriminately to all, yet all do not receive him.” [Calvin’s Commentary on Romans 5:18]
Nevertheless, forasmuch as it is not in us to discern between the righteous and the sinners that go to destruction, but that Jesus Christ has suffered His death and passion as well for them as for us, therefore it behoves us to labour to bring every man to salvation, that the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ may be available to them ...” [Sermon CXVI on the Book of Job (31:29-32)]
“The word many is not put definitely for a fixed number, but for a large number; for he contrasts himself with all others. And in this sense it is used in Romans 5:15, where Paul does not speak of any part of men, but embraces the whole human race.” [Calvin’s Commentary on Matthew 20:28]
“For he intended expressly to state [in John 3:16] that, though we appear to have been born to death, undoubted deliverance is offered to us by the faith of Christ; and, therefore, that we ought not to fear death, which otherwise hangs over us. And he has employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such is also the import of the term World, which he formerly used; for though nothing will be found in the world that is worthy of the favour of God, YET HE SHOWS HIMSELF TO BE RECONCILED TO THE WHOLE WORLD, when he invites all men without exception to faith in Christ, which is nothing else than an entrance into life.” (Calvin’s Commentary on the Gospel of John)
I am a steadfast four-pointer (Amyraldian), but I still appreciate and understand the other side's perspective on the length of Jesus's atonement. Great video, Reverends Aniol, Buice, and Walker!
Do you have anything to boast? All the Glory is to Jesus and God Our Father.
10:46 "The Father imposed His wrath due unto, and the Son underwent punishment for, either:
1. All the sins of all men.
2. All the sins of some men, or
3. Some of the sins of all men.
In which case it may be said:
38:22 "There is nothing between me and hell save Christ? There is nothing between me and Jehovah's wrath save Christ? There is nothing between me and instant destruction save Christ? But he is enough. He with the censor in his hand God's great ordained Priest-he is enough."
CHS #341
Personally, as of right now, I prefer the Lutheran doctrine of the Crux Theologorum (problem of theology) better than Calvin’s Limited Atonement, even though I have always attended Baptist churches since accepting the Gospel at age 26 (currently a reformed baptist church), grew up church of Christ, and do not agree with many other Lutheran doctrines. I think it describes better the Biblical truths, though leaves more mystery. I think remembering that God’s ways are not our ways is helpful. Perhaps there are some aspects of how God works in His grace that we cannot understand? So basically the crux is this: God desires all to be saved, but not all will be saved. If a man is saved, it is wholly by the gracious election of God, but if a man is not saved, it’s entirely man’s own choosing because God doesn’t predestine souls to damnation. The Bible seems silent on exactly how all this works out, but we can trust God’s sovereignty and humbly be silent where we aren’t given clear insight in the Bible.
And maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think it’s damnable heresy and since I spent the first 14 years in Armenian baptist churches being told Calvinism is heresy, I think I’ve come a long way. I don’t think Calvinists are heretics and I keep studying to understand better.
The election goes both ways though. God elects some to salvation and elects others to eternal damnation.
11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad-in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls- 12 she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 As it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." (Romans 9:11-13, ESV)
Before Jacob or Esau had done anything bad, God determined that He loves Jacob, and hates Esau. This was in order that God's election might continue. Paul lays out the double-election principle here.
This is why Paul starts this section with saying
For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. (Romans 9:3, ESV)
The anticipated question, "Is there any injustice on God's part?" because He condemns before creation who are His who are not His. Paul responds by saying quoting God when He spoke to Moses "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." (Romans 9:15, ESV)
So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. (Romans 9:18, ESV)
22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory- (Romans 9:22-23, ESV)
And this chapter is about both Jews and Gentiles
24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? 25 As indeed he says in Hosea, "Those who were not my people I will call 'my people,' and her who was not beloved I will call 'beloved.'" 26 "And in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' there they will be called 'sons of the living God.'" (Romans 9:24-26, ESV)
Christ died for the sin of ALL men (while we were still sinners He died). But the atonement can only be applied to the sinner who believes God's wrath, deserved for his sin, was poured out instead on the innocent Lamb of God. And God commands all men everywhere to repent and receive this free atonement. God is not going to choose anyone unconditionally for salvation or damnation. He has a condition - whether or not we are in Christ by faith.
Romans 5:11,18 KJV
And not only so, but _we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ,_ *_ by whom we have now received the atonement._*
[18] Therefore as by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so *_by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men_* unto justification of life.
Acts 17:30-31 KJV
And the times of this ignorance *_God_* winked at; but *_now commandeth all men every where to repent:_*
[31] Because *_he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained_* …
Psalm 32:1-2 NASB95
*_How blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, Whose sin is covered!_*
[2] *_How blessed is the man to whom the LORD does not impute iniquity,_* And in whose spirit there is no deceit!
17:30 All of these instances of "all" are speaking generally about groups - some of them are "all without distinction" some of them are "all without exception", and some of them are hyperbole (meaning "most or the large majority"). The Bible isn't a computer program, so it's OK for a word to have a flexible range of meanings. So the problem should be obvious at this point - the word doesn't have the flexibility you need. Because you need "all" to mean "very few", not "very many". You need it to refer to a select group of people, rather than a teeming throng. Most importantly, you need the word to be as small as possible in contexts where the natural reading of the text would imply a more literal interpretation.
The point isn't that you can't be right about this. It's that you lose the right to say you're taking the plain reading of the text - so you can't hold any of your opponents to the same standard. If the plain reading of Romans 9 were Calvinism (it isn't, but for the sake of argument) - then you can't object to Arminians or others interpreting it away, since you have to do the same thing with all of their proof-texts.
When you were a young, naive college student, you had better sense than you do as an experienced, educated professional. Sometimes things seem wrong because they're wrong. Limited Atonement is a good example.
23:30 This is a better response than "I am special, I am elect, I deserve this" (absolute pride). But it isn't absolute humility. Paul had the right response in the first six verses of Romans 9. He would have given his own salvation for the sake of his beloved countrymen (the Jews who had by-and-large rejected Christ). The response of humility is "why not someone else? Why not my brother or my friend, my neighbor, my child - why not my enemy?"
An aside: I think it's weird that you're willing to argue the "all-ness" out of the word "all" because it's sometimes used figuratively, or generally -- but you draw the line at reading anything in Genesis 1-11 figuratively. A bit inconsistent.
James White greatest argument is "yea hath God said" I don't really understand how a calvinist can believe in the say tulip and yet not hold to one true word written to elect men from a sovereign God.
My challenge to the Armineans who believe Christ died for everyone is to think through the fact that, if God foreknew when he created that not all people would choose Christ, why would he have his son die for people who won't accept him and wind up in hell?Due to listening to James White's podcasts I've been reformed for about 3 years.The argument that helped me to fully embrace definite atonement (besides being clearly shown that it is Biblical) is if one comes to see that unconditional election is taught in scripture and one understands that the holy trinity has to function in complete unity, then the only logical conclusion is Christ died to redeem those that the Father has chosen from eternity past to save.Thanks for your excellent treatment of the topic.Blessings to you all.
So the God you believe in could just pick everyone if He wanted to, since He just ‘picks’ some and His decision is He wants them to go to hell. That’s not the God of the Bible, who desires that all would come to repentance and takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. And the ‘condition’ Jesus gave was to believe in Him, and WHOSEVER believes in Him will have eternal life. Also the Bible never says regeneration comes before faith. It says faith comes by hearing the word of God. God made people with free will, He chose to do it that way and has the power and right to do so. People having free will on this tiny planet in a universe with trillions of planets is no threat to God. Everyone wants to talk about what God foreknew etc, and the only way He could foreknow is if He authored every single action - if you think that you just put God in a box you created. The Bible says there is no limit to His understanding. For a human to think they can fully comprehend (and a fallen human at that) what God knows and how He knows it is ridiculous.
@@keith3362 As with all other"people choose Christ out of their free will" believers you try to prove that with scriptures that are nothing more than statements of fact - all people who believe will be saved.The Greek phrase that has been translated into English as "whosoever believes" in John 3:16 is literally "all the believing ones" or "all who believe".There is nothing in the word "whosoever" that implies that just anyone can or will.There are other scriptures that address the fact that no one can choose for Christ/express faith in Christ unless God draws them to do so i.e. John 6:44.
Scripture says that the sovereign God we worship created because He wanted to glorify himself.In other words he wanted to do so in such a way in which he would demonstrate ALL his attributes including his holiness, righteousness, love, grace, mercy, wrath, justice, etc.Scripture also says that he has ordained all that comes to pass according to His plans and purposes.And yes...that includes choosing before the foundation of the world who would be His people in Christ.
Just because God does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked doesn't mean that's not his will.After all, wasn't it God that told Adam and Eve that if they disobeyed His one command in the garden they would surely die?And He knew they would when he gave that command to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, right?If He knew before they did disobey that they would, then when the time came for them to choose could they have done something different falsifying God's foreknowledge?
If someone believes that when he created he had perfect foreknowledge of all future events (putting aside the question of why He had that knowledge) and that includes all future behaviors/choices of His human creatures then during the course of time could any of those events/choices/behaviors be different than what God foreknew they would be when He created?If one believes that God cannot be wrong about anything he foreknew then it presupposes that everything was fixed from the time he created.Only open theists who believe God could not know ahead of time the actions/choices of libertarianly free creatures have a philosophically consistent position.
"why would he have his son die for people who won't accept him" this is such an easy question. It's because God loves them.
@@josephbrandenburg4373 So then in your estimation, to a large extent, Christ's death was purposeless because most people won't accept him and be saved.And the triune God knew that when He created.Seems pretty foolish to me.
@@Brenda-qo4ko Think about someone you love. What would you do for them? If you went to great, extravagent effort to give them something, and they refused -- was that purposeless?
If your answer is "yes," then I think it can only be because you've never experienced this -- in which case I envy you, because it is absolutely the worst pain anyone could ever experience. But since I have been through this myself, very recently, I can tell you that it was in no sense meaningless or purposeless. It's what you do when you love someone. That's the greatest meaning there can ever be. No purpose could possibly surpass that.
Anyways, I don't think the objection you raised is a serious one. It starts by assuming something critical about the atonement, which I don't think you're even aware of. Think about it. What deduction is missing? What other conclusion could be drawn under a different understanding of the startinf premises?
I'll tell you where our thoughts are different and why they lead to different conclusions, but I want to see if you have any guesses, first.
Why must we point out limited atonement at all. Does it change anything? Can't we just give someone the gospel? Either they believe, trust, and follow Christ, or they don't? I really don't understand why it has to be pointed out. I praise God for Jesus Christ sacrifice for me. God knows from the beginning whether or not anyone will believe it's not a secret to Him.
The real atonement is going on now.....that is extremely important to your salvation. Judgment is almost over.
@HonrbleMention I agree 💯! He already knew each and every one of us. God knows everything about everything. What's not to love and worship our awesome God.
@HonrbleMention I totally understand and agree with limited atonement. To "push that point" isn't necessary. Share the gospel with everyone. They will either believe or not. It doesn't matter at all if they are told about the atonement or not.
@HonrbleMention Can't happen once you're dead. Way too late.
@realitytime2024 because a universal atonement comes from this false idea that everyone has an opportunity to be saved rather than the biblical truth that Christ saves perfectly everyone He tries to save. In the people’s eyes, everyone has to have the same opportunity to be saved, and because of this, Christ has to die for everyone to give everyone a shot. This puts salvation in man’s hands rather than God’s which is completely unbiblical. So it is important that we talk about limited atonement because it is the difference of God gaining glory in our hearts from His salvation or not…
15:50 A man is not saved because he believes in Christ, he believes in Christ because he is saved.
Loraine Boettner
Funny how they don’t want people to call Calvinists heretical, but then turn around and call the early church fathers heretics.
Augustine, the great “proto-Calvinist” in their minds, must be roasting in hell for his views on the Eucharist and Baptism, if we follow their logic.
21:52 "Puritanism, Protestantism, Calvinism are poor names which the world has given to our great and glorious faith - the doctrine of Paul the apostle, the gospel of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."
__ Charles Spurgeon
Ok, so as someone who has been wrestling with these doctrines a long time, I would like to know, what happens if one of the “elect” never hears the Gospel? What if we fail to evangelize them? If they don’t accept the Gospel, then are they lost? And then, are they not the elect after all? And if they’ll be saved no matter what, then why do street evangelism or debates and the like, at all? Why not wait for them to come to us when God draws them?
Exactly, if I love God but I’m not of the elect what’s the point? G3 guys aren’t going to respond to these questions?
God not only ordains who will come to faith, he also ordains how they will come to faith. There is no such thing as an elect who will never hear. Those whom God has chosen will hear the gospel, the Holy Spirit will change their hearts, they will submit to Christ, and they will be saved.
If they are elect it means they are elected to grace that means its the job of the Holy Spirit to bring them, the are regenerated shown their condition and brought to salvation I think you. Jesus said except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God
@@monks6766 only the elect who have been regenerated can actually love God.
@@ScottAniol Amen!
I'm just pointing out every example of "all" he said wouldn't make sense are the ones Arminians cites to prove their point.
Apostle Paul Said works salvation is herecy, leading to hell (Galatians 1:8-9). And most reformers saw arminianism as herecy. I wonder how many Calvinists today call arminianism just "bad theology" and not what it is - HERECY, leading to hell!
Explain
Works salvation, faith 'alone' for salvation, grace 'alone' for salvation are all heresy.
We all must cooperate with His Grace.
Works of mercy are a Christian duty, proof of an active faith.
"What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds?
Can such faith save him?
Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?" James 2
Eph 2:
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God- 9 not the result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are what he has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life.
* DEUT. 29:43. IT IS PLAINLY SHOWN THAT GOD DOTH NOT CAST FORTH HIS GRACE WITHOUT DIRECTION, BUT THAT IT IS ONLY FOR THOSE WHOM HE HATH CHOSEN, FOR THOSE THAT ARE OF THE BODY OF HIS CHURCH, AND OF HIS FLOCK.
THUS WE SEE WHAT ST. PAUL MEANETH WHEN HE SAITH, GOD WILL HAVE ALL MEN TO BE SAVED: THAT IS, HE WILL HAVE SOME OF ALL NATIONS, AND ALL CONDITIONS.
JOHN CALVIN The
Salvation of All Men
19:32 "The world should realize with increased clearness that Evangelicalism stands or falls with Calvinism."
-B.B. Warfield
❤😊
Limited atonement isn’t in the Bible. He is the lamb of God who takes away/takes the punishment, for the sins of the world. Calvinists just can’t have it that way because if it’s true then their whole unbiblical doctrine starts to fall apart. How dare anyone say God does not make salvation available for all.
All" means THOSE WHOM God will draw to Jesus Christ for salvation.
@@davidochiengbuoga7165 really? But he wont draw all like Jesus said He would if he was lifted up? What about this scripture - Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. (Romans 5:18, KJV) there is 2 alls there I bet you believe the first but not the second but that would be disagreeing with Paul.
@@keith3362 Jesus Christ gives glory to His Father always.When He said, He will draw men to Himself when lifted up, It is actually not Him but His Father who will draw people to Jesus
If He died for "all" ,then all will be in His kingdom, but that's not true.
Of, course,by Adam all mankind (both the elect and none elect) were made sinners.But by the obedience of Jesus Christ",all"the elect will made righteous..
God will grant them the saving faith in order to become righteous.The rest He hardens their hearts not to believe.
He does everything according to His own ends-even the wicked for a day of disaster (Proverbs 16:4)
@@davidochiengbuoga7165 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:6, KJV) - so all have sinned and God placed everyone's sins onto Jesus on the cross. So what is required of people then? For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. (John 3:16, NASB) He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” (John 3:36, NASB) They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” (Acts 16:31, NASB) So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. (Romans 10:17, NASB) But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. (Galatians 3:22, NASB) So I see by scripture the requirement is to believe. But Calvinism twists that, of course it says you need to believe, but it says God makes you believe by regeneration, which is simply not in the bible. Then Calvinists will say well you did something to get saved though. But faith isn't a work and Paul confirms it -To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. (Romans 3:26, KJV) Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. (Romans 3:27, KJV) Who is God the justifier of? Some people who won the election lottery? No the ones who believe in Jesus. So back to Isaiah -All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:6, KJV) Do you believe the first all in this scripture means every person, ever - and if so why doesn't the second one mean that also? Your answer will come from Calvinism and not the bible.
It may be hard for people to accept, but it is the most beautiful doctrine of the 5.
Limited Atonement, or Particular Redemption, is the ONLY right and biblical declaration of what Jesus Christ ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHED at Calvary. It is the difference between Christ actually accomplishing the redemption of a particular people, or merely making redemption POSSIBLE for all the people that have ever lived or ever will live. I ask then, what glorifies the triune God more fully, the ACTUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT of salvation, or the mere POSSIBILITY of salvation?
Except not. 1 John 2:2
The Scriptures glorify God "more fully", not your Calvinism-biased ranking criteria.
Limited atonement is a joke.
If Jesus died for the sins of all men, nowhere does the Bible say that means all men would be saved. That’s only in Calvinist books, not the Bible. Jesus clearly gave a condition - He pays the price for your sins, something you could never do, and you must put your faith in Him. Of course all of this tears down the bricks of Calvinism so they won’t be having it.
The problem with that train of logic is that it then assumes all world is free of sin, which if that being the case, means they will bear fruit that leads to sanctification and then eternal life (Romans 6:22). That would entail (as mentioned in the video) Christ dying for those who were lost anyway?
@@teyyyy1 No it doesn’t. ‘But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, (John 1:12, NASB). As many as received Him. ‘In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation-having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, (Ephesians 1:13, NASB)’ Having also believed. If people choose to remain in sin and not put their faith in Jesus that is on them not God. ‘For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. (Romans 1:16, NASB)’ It’s the power of God for salvation only if you believe, by faith we are saved through grace.
@@keith3362 I wasn’t pinning the fault on Jesus for unbelievers. Rather adhering to the logical conclusion of the “soft universalism” that unlimited atonement drives forward. Whether Arminian or Calvinist, we all know with certainty that not every one will be saved. What remains then is the efficiency of the atonement on offer. If only some are saved, it stands to reason that the efficiency of atonement will be for them.
"you must put your faith in Him" I don't disagree with you on this. The point that I still have to ask: is the faith I put in Christ of my own creation, or as Hebrews 12 states, Christ is the author of my faith? If my faith comes from without, then on what basis can I put faith (which I don't have) in Christ unless He first authors my faith?
@@pitchfordfamily8306 Christ is the author in your faith as without the Holy Spirit’s softening of your heart you aren’t, and never were capable, of seeking him out in the first place (Romans 3:10-11). In that regard, the Calvinist holds to Rebirth then Faith. The Arminian believes the reverse.
Just a comment for the algorithm...