Sins cannot be charged!

[throughfaith]

Some believe the truths of the Cross are foolishness.

Some follow men such as Augustine, Calvin , Beza , Edwards , Pink , sproul , Washer , Piper , Macarthur, ect and have never really understood the actual text themselves .

 

[throughfaith]

Those Christ died for, will not have sin laid to their charge. They saved, and will be given faith to believe.

Its a whole world of People that God doesnt charge with their sins 2 Cor 5:19

19 to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation

19 to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
If Paul really did mean that God reconciled the whole world how should he have said it ?

God can and is free to accept everyone on basis of faith because of the cross . You ,just like all those sheep that are following doctrines of men ,have believed the lie that Jesus only reconciled a chosen few and only paid for those sins . This is the deception you have bought into ,before you ever began to understand the bible for yourself. I know because for a season i too was sucked into the teachings. It took me nearly two years to fully unravel from it . Wake up !!

 

[throughfaith]

Its written 2 Tim 3:7

ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

You never began to learn ..You got off at the calvinist station . You may never return to the Scriptures if you don't find your way out .

 

[throughfaith]

Some believe the truths of the Cross are foolishness.

Every calvinist i ever spoke with thinks every non calvinist has a dilemma . That the atonement has to be limited otherwise ' universalism is the only other conclusion. its a trap that causes so many Christians to be sucked into reformed teachings..That " if Jesus died for the sins of every one then everyone has to be saved " This is the folly of the system .

 

[posthuman]

No one is arguing that God imputed sin to the ones He declares righteous by faith.

But the scripture doesn't say these is the ones He exclusively died for. It says He died for all and the one that believes is saved.

You are writing your own Bible instead of believing the One God wrote.

Of course it means that.

then you need to explain why the scripture says He died for everyone because you're preaching heresy unless you can justify saying something explicitly contrary to multiple witnesses in God's word. Hebrews 2:9, 1 Corinthians 5:14-15, 1 John 2:2 are not 'esoteric, hard to interpret' passages -- they're clear in what they say, even if understanding the implications of what they say might be something deep. there's not room in the Truth for you to deny them.

OK? going around in a Christian forum preaching exactly the opposite of what the Bible says isn't very cool.

He did taste death for every man He tasted death for

saying "everyone means absolutely not-everyone in fact only a very specific few" is very plainly twisting scripture just as much as saying "yes means not really, no, not at all" -- this is "invalid exposition"

 

[Roughsoul1991]

There is no "already forgiven" in the bible. We are only forgiven IF we repent.

1Jn_1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

As I clarified. Repentance has two different areas. The clarification was to fix either an intentional or non-intentional idea that to stay forgiven we must repent and repent often. Giving repentance a works-based salvation vibe.

 

[posthuman]

then you need to explain why the scripture says He died for everyone because you're preaching heresy unless you can justify saying something explicitly contrary to multiple witnesses in God's word. Hebrews 2:9, 1 Corinthians 5:14-15, 1 John 2:2 are not 'esoteric, hard to interpret' passages -- they're clear in what they say, even if understanding the implications of what they say might be something deep. there's not room in the Truth for you to deny them.

OK? going around in a Christian forum preaching exactly the opposite of what the Bible says isn't very cool.





saying "everyone means absolutely not-everyone in fact only a very specific few" is very plainly twisting scripture just as much as saying "yes means not really, no, not at all" -- this is "invalid exposition"

what i'm trying to tell you bro @brightfame52 is that you need to learn how to justify what you preach, and to stop preaching things you can't justify. i'm not trying to be mean; i'm trying to help you out. we all love Christ here and look to Him as our Hope & Home, OK? and we want to have good deep discussions about Him and Who He is.

 

[Roughsoul1991]

Every calvinist i ever spoke with thinks every non calvinist has a dilemma . That the atonement has to be limited otherwise ' universalism is the only other conclusion. its a trap that causes so many Christians to be sucked into reformed teachings..That " if Jesus died for the sins of every one then everyone has to be saved " This is the folly of the system .

Not so. You also have free will. So no universalism is not the only alternative.

 

[posthuman]

Every calvinist i ever spoke with thinks every non calvinist has a dilemma . That the atonement has to be limited otherwise ' universalism is the only other conclusion. its a trap that causes so many Christians to be sucked into reformed teachings..That " if Jesus died for the sins of every one then everyone has to be saved " This is the folly of the system .

i think that both calvinists and pelagians believe in functionally limited atonement. it's either limited by the facts of predestination or it's limited by a variance in human agency. if a person is particularly attracted to acronyms maybe they call it something it isn't, but apart from @brightfame52 who by reason of reticence i assume doesn't fully comprehend the things he espouses, what i've found is that nobody here who squarely lands in one of those camps, who i've talked to at length, really thinks otherwise.

 

[throughfaith]

Not so. You also have free will. So no universalism is not the only alternative.

I agree . I'm saying this is what the calvinist believes.

 

[brightfame52]

So explain it then.

Waste of time to do that

 

[brightfame52]

then you need to explain why the scripture says He died for everyone because you're preaching heresy unless you can justify saying something explicitly contrary to multiple witnesses in God's word. Hebrews 2:9, 1 Corinthians 5:14-15, 1 John 2:2 are not 'esoteric, hard to interpret' passages -- they're clear in what they say, even if understanding the implications of what they say might be something deep. there's not room in the Truth for you to deny them.

OK? going around in a Christian forum preaching exactly the opposite of what the Bible says isn't very cool.





saying "everyone means absolutely not-everyone in fact only a very specific few" is very plainly twisting scripture just as much as saying "yes means not really, no, not at all" -- this is "invalid exposition"

Again He tasted death for all He tasted death for. That all cannot be charged with sin.

 

[throughfaith]

Again He tasted death for all He tasted death for. That all cannot be charged with

Again He tasted death for all He tasted death for. That all cannot be charged with sin.

We could have a verse that says " Jesus died for every sin in the world , every person head for head ,soul for soul . There is not one person Jesus did not die for , his blood covered absolutely everyone and everything with out exception or distinction " A Calvinist would still say " yes every ' elect' person Jesus died for " ...or " well in the Greek it actually means ....."

 

[posthuman]

Again He tasted death for all He tasted death for.

it's written, He tasted death for everyone

 

[Grandpa]

it seems to me that it's simply a matter of whether that all-sufficient blood is applied or not. the sacrifice is made, but if it isn't sprinkled on the mercy seat or painted on the doorpost, does it accomplish the sanctification for which it was intended?

he must be lifted up just as the brazen serpent in the wilderness. but what happens to the person, bitten, who refuses to look?
does their lack of belief make the pole disappear? i don't think so; it still stands. He held out His hands all day, but they would not turn - still, His hands were held out.

I think a better term for us to use (instead of atonement and propitiation) would be 'cure'.

The cure was given 2000 yrs ago but you have to take it (of course) in order for it do anything.

When we say 'atonement' or 'propitiation' it doesn't have the necessary fuller meaning that 'cure' has. I know 'cure' isn't exactly correct either but it implies necessary secondary action that atonement and propititiation don't.


The sin of the whole world have not been atoned for.

The atonement for the sins of the whole world has been given.


Meaning, there is no more sacrifice needed to atone for any sins. But not all sins are atoned until all come to Christ and receive these blessings.

 

[Grandpa]

but 1 John 2:2 says "not only ours" ((believers)) "but also the whole world" ((non-believers))

how do i make it say "not only ours" ((believers)) "but also the whole world" ((also believers)) ??


someone may be willing to die for a good man. but God showed His love for us in that He died for His enemies.
yes, He lay down His life for His friends. He said to Judas, with Satan inside him, "friend, why have you come"

i think if i knew why He calls Satan/Judas "friend" i'd know what it means, to love your enemy & do good to those that persecute you

"Also the whole world" is referring to people who have not come to Christ.

Not that they will never come. They just have not come yet. These are future believers. For all time, from then until the end.


It is not to be implied that the sins of the whole world HAVE BEEN propitiated. But that the propitiation for the sins of the whole world has been provided. Its a pretty big difference.

 

[posthuman]

I think a better term for us to use (instead of atonement and propitiation) would be 'cure'.

The cure was given 2000 yrs ago but you have to take it (of course) in order for it do anything.

When we say 'atonement' or 'propitiation' it doesn't have the necessary fuller meaning that 'cure' has. I know 'cure' isn't exactly correct either but it implies necessary secondary action that atonement and propititiation don't.


The sin of the whole world have not been atoned for.

The atonement for the sins of the whole world has been given.


Meaning, there is no more sacrifice needed to atone for any sins. But not all sins are atoned until all come to Christ and receive these blessings.

yes, this is how i'm understanding it too. so the question isn't whether the veil has been rent or not -- whether for some people it has or for others it hasn't -- but the question becomes, who will go in?
in a sense it's because the way has been opened, but many refuse to walk in it, that they remain in their sins - without excuse

 

[Grandpa]

There is no getting away from what that bible says . Jesus died for the sins of the whole world . The error is to believe this saves everyone .

The Lord Jesus died for the sins of the whole world of believers in Christ.

Those who don't believe in Christ retain their sin. And are condemned because of it.

 

[throughfaith]

The Lord Jesus died for the sins of the whole world of believers in Christ.

Those who don't believe in Christ retain their sin. And are condemned because of it.

Yet no verse says this " Jesus died for the sins of the whole world of believers in Christ." This is calvinst anti biblical nonsense .

 

[posthuman]

"Also the whole world" is referring to people who have not come to Christ.

Not that they will never come. They just have not come yet. These are future believers. For all time, from then until the end.


It is not to be implied that the sins of the whole world HAVE BEEN propitiated. But that the propitiation for the sins of the whole world has been provided. Its a pretty big difference.

well the passage does say, He "is the propitiation" for all, rather than He 'has made propitiation for all'

so i still think that 'also the whole world' refers to, well, everyone. but it's not saying all sins are no longer accounted; it's saying He is the way that all sins are forgiven, for whosoever will believe. the water available for whosoever will drink.

as though this saying is more about His uniqueness and His dominion, not our inclusion in Him. He divides and separates; from the beginning He divided the light from the darkness, and He separates the sheep from the goats - John goes on in the next few paragraphs describing people who are in darkness rather than light, saying 'the truth is not in them' and that they don't abide in Him.
so John is definitely not talking about universal salvation -- but there's a reason he writes 'not ours only but also the whole world' instead of 'not ours only but also all who believe' and i take it to be, he's declaring the riches of God's mercy to anyone who will turn to Him. to me this doesn't contradict His purpose in election at all, but instead, is all the more damning to everyone who refuses to believe, because they would not come to Him, even while the way is made open for them to.