Is the doctrine of limited atonement biblical?

I would most definitely say that this is to the Jews in the last days. See chapter 1.

6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. Better covenant than the old in which the Jews were under.
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: The house of Israel and Judah is not the Church.
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. All about the Jews
10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: The reign of Christ
11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. No evangelism needed in the Millennium. They all shall know Him because He will be here reigning on earth.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

Well, folks, here you have it..a denial that the New Covenant is for the Church today.

Too bad Jesus and Paul didn't get informed of this.

Real believers have the law of God written on their heart..that is what regeneration is about.

Real believers know God personally. They don't need a priest to teach them, although the gift of teaching still works within the Church.

Real believers have their sins forgiven..they aren't just bandaged over, like the blood of animals did in ancient Israel. Real healing has occurred.

Here's what Spurgeon has said in regards to dispensationalists:


“Distinctions have been drawn by certain exceedingly wise men (measured by their own estimate of themselves), between the people of God who lived before the coming of Christ, and those who lived afterwards. We have even heard it asserted that those who lived before the coming of Christ do not belong to the church of God!

We never know what we shall hear next, and perhaps it is a mercy that these absurdities are revealed at one time, in order that we may be able to endure their stupidity without dying of amazement. Why, every child of God in every place stands on the same footing; the Lord has not some children best beloved, some second-rate offspring, and others whom he hardly cares about.

These who saw Christ’s day before it came, had a great difference as to what they knew, and perhaps in the same measure a difference as to what they enjoyed while on earth meditating upon Christ; but they were all washed in the same blood, all redeemed with the same ransom price, and made members of the same body.

Israel in the covenant of grace is not natural Israel, but all believers in all ages. Before the first advent, all the types and shadows all pointed one way —they pointed to Christ, and to him all the saints looked with hope. Those who lived before Christ were not saved with a different salvation to that which shall come to us. They exercised faith as we must; that faith struggled as ours struggles, and that faith obtained its reward as ours shall”

Charles Spurgeon
Devotional Classics of C H Spurgeon, p122

The Scriptures tell us that David killed a bear and a lion, where in the Scriptures do you see this encounter? No where, but we have to accept it because it is Scripture, so I do not have to find where, I have to take Scriptures for what it says. Amazing, you will believer one but not the other.

If the commandment to go into all the world and preach the gospel ti every creature has already fulfilled then according to your view then no one thereafter can be save, meaning you are seeking God in vain because you will go to eternal damnation with if you are to hold your view.

The Prophet Isaiah described the coming of the Messiah as follows, "for unto us a child "is born" speaking as if it has already occurred. So, if you believe that the gospel was already preached to every creature in the earth, then, with your understanding, you have to believe that Messiah came prior to the birth of Yeshua, with this being said then you are not following the true Messiah with your view. Now you can see what happens when you go into the Scriptures trying to interpret the word of God fit your view, you distort the word of God. The Apostle Paul knowing that it was going to occur at a later time spoke as if it happened.

I did not respond to the others because the above say it all.

----------------------------------

Please respond to my response to you on Colossians 1:23. I bought out that Isaiah spoke as if Yeshua was born during his day when he said, unto us a child is born and a son is given. As you can see, he took a prophesy and spoke as it fulfilled in his time.

What the above says is misinterpreted by listening to the interpretations of false preachers. David killed a lion and a bear. 1 Samuel 17:36, Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear, and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them. KJV.

Saved, according to Strong's concordance, means "delivered". Romans 10:1-2-3, Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel (Jacob/Israel) is, that they might be saved (delivered from their lack of knowledge, they are already secured to heaven) For I bear them record that they "have a zeal of God"(the natural man, 1 Cor 2:14, does not have a zeal of God), but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness (babes in Christ), and are going about to establish their own righteousness (by their good works, as many on this forum are doing), have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God

Jesus instructed his Apostles to go and preach to the "lost sheep"(God's born again children) of the house of Israel.(Preaching the gospel can deliver a babe in Christ here in time, but hearing the gospel does not deliver anyone eternally) God changed Jacob's name to be called no more Jacob, but to be called Israel, Gen 33:28. Romans 9, God chose Jacob over Esau to show that his "election: might stand. Jacob/Israel is representative of God's elect people. There is the nation of Israel, and there is Jacob/Israel, and these two are not the same, and must be interpreted according to the context.

The spiritual man can deliver (save) his born again brother here in time, by teaching them the knowledge of the gospel, but only God can save (deliver) them eternally. and he does not have to have man's help, it is by God's sovereign grace.

You did not respond to what I was stating in regard to David.

As for Romans 10:1-3, you are interpreting this passage of the Scriptures to fit your view. The Scriptures tell us that if one's righteousness does not exceed the righteousness of the Pharisee they cannot enter the kingdom of God. This passage has nothing to do with the gathering of the elects as you put it.

If the hearing of the gospel does not deliver anyone eternally, then not only are you distorting the Gospel of Yeshua, but you are not even saved.

I decided not to respond to the rest of your post, why? You did not respond to my post about David and about Isaiah prophesying of the birth of Yeshua, but spoke as if it happened during his times, which is how the Apostle Paul made his statement, but he understood that the Gospel needs to be preached to the world.

So this is what you believe... you are not sure that you are saved being that you are not one of the elect as previously stated and that you believe that the Gospel has already been preached throughout the world which is a preposterous statement that insinuates that today the gospel being preached in vain. Again, you distorted the word of God, you are telling me that you are not save and I will say this, I hope everyone see that you are not only distorting the word of God, but you made it clear that you are not saved because you are not an elect.

People like you deliberately blind themselves to the truth which is why they don't respond accordingly.

As previously stated, you view is all distorted, it is not scriptural.

I

It all depends on the right interpretation of the scriptures, while keeping them in harmony with each other. Your belief has too many scriptures that contradict each other, and do not harmonize. You, evidently, have based your belief from listening to false preachers and have become unteachable to the truths of the scriptures. Scriptures prove themselves, if you use them as your only means of gleaning the truth.

--------------------------

First, the difference between us is that you go into the Scriptures trying to interpret the word of God which is why you come out with a distorted view. You are no different than "unitedwithchrist" when you cannot respond accordingly you immediately make false claims. First, God is my teacher, not man and I do not care who it is, if I disagree with a well known person, I will point it out that they are distorting God's word, what God made clear when he first spoke. Secondly, I do not read commentaries.

I responded with an example and you refused to respond because it proved that you have a distorted view. Until you respond accordingly you are teaching a distorted doctrine!

Here's a new article on limited atonement by Kevin DeYoung.

The reason why limited atonement is important is that it teaches an ACTUAL atonement, not a HYPOTHETICAL atonement.

Free-willers deny that the atonement actually has reconciled anyone to God, but has only provided a theoretical atonement. Reformed individuals teach that the atonement actually liberated specific individuals, and this atonement will be applied to them at the proper time.

In the free-willer view, Jesus really did not die for his sheep, but he died for all mankind. In other words, there are individuals who suffer eternal punishment whom his atonement applied to. They are being punished for their sins, even though Jesus paid the cost for them.

Note: the author has limited his words to 500 in this description, so it is not a comprehensive treatment.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevin-deyoung/theological-primer-limited-atonement/

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Theological Primer - Limited Atonement
Kevin DeYoung

The doctrine of limited atonement—the L in TULIP—teaches that Christ effectively redeems from every people “only those who were chosen from eternity to salvation” (Canons of Dort, II.8). As Ursinus explains in his commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, Christ’s death was for everyone “as it respects the sufficiency of satisfaction which he made, but not as it respects the application thereof.” In other words, the death of Christ was sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world, but it was God’s will that it should effectively redeem those and only those who were chosen from eternity and given to Christ by the Father.

Particular redemption is often considered a more favorable term, because the point of the doctrine is not to limit the mercy of God, but to make clear that Jesus did not die in the place of every sinner on the earth, but for his particular people. The good shepherd lays his life down, not for the goats, but for the sheep (John 10:11). This is why John 6 says Jesus came to save those the Father had given to him, and why Matthew 1:21 says he died for his people, and John 15:13 says for his friends, and Acts 20:28 says for the church, and Ephesians 5:25 says for his bride, and Ephesians 1:4 says for those chosen in Christ Jesus.

The doctrine of particular redemption is worth defining and defending because it gets to the heart of the gospel. Should we say “Christ died so that sinners might come to him”? Or, “Christ died for sinners”? Did Christ’s work on the cross make it possible for sinners to come to God? Or did Christ’s work on the cross actually reconcile sinners to God? In other words, does the death of Jesus Christ make us save-able or does it make us saved?

If the atonement is not particularly and only for the sheep, then either we have universalism—Christ died in everyone’s place and therefore everyone is saved—or we have something less than full substitution. “We are often told that we limit the atonement of Christ,” Spurgeon observed, “because we say that Christ has not made a satisfaction for all men, or all men would be saved.” But, Spurgeon argued, it is the view of the atonement that says no one in particular was saved at the cross that actually limits Christ’s death. “We say Christ so died that he infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ’s death not only may be saved, but are saved, must be saved, and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved.”

Christ does not come to us merely saying, “I’ve done my part. I laid down my life for everyone because I have saving love for everyone in the whole world. Now, if you would only believe and come to me I can save you.” Instead he says to us, I was pierced for your transgressions. I was crushed for your iniquities (Isa. 53:5). I have purchased with my blood men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation (Rev. 5:9). I myself bore your sins in my body on the tree, so that you might infallibly die to sins and assuredly live for righteousness. For my wounds did not merely make healing available. They healed you (1 Pet. 2:24).

“Amazing love!” a great Arminian once wrote. “How can it be that you, my God, should die for me?!” Praise be to our Good Shepherd who didn’t just make our salvation possible, but sustained the anger of God in body and soul, shouldered the curse, and laid down his life for the sheep.

I will also add that the freewiller concept of universal atonement takes away the personalness of the atonement, as Kevin alludes to, in his last sentences.

You can't have it both ways, folks.

Also, check out my thread on, is the doctrine of limited atonement biblical? if you want to see my scriptural support.

https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...octrine-of-limited-atonement-biblical.187815/

The law of God "death" is written on the stony heart of mankind.Revealed as wrath from heaven.

We need the whole law, the perfect in order to create new spirit life. To the law and the prophets if they hear not sola scriptural then neither would they believe by walking by sight . We walk by faith a work God works in us . Mixing the things seen the temporal with the unseen understanding of the gospel the eternal .

The power to wrestle against flesh and blood the things seen having the Spirit of Christ to over come the judgment of the flesh strengthening us in our weakness.

It would seem you simply make the word "apostle" without effect.

No power coming from the earthen body of those God moves.

Abel the first recorded apostle, prophet is also the first recorded martyr.

Change the meaning of a word change the author . We must be careful how we hear or say.

The Old testament apostles (powerless) received the living faith of Christ at their rebirth (hearing of faith) just as us today . The end of our new found faith from the beginning .Not piece by piece . But the whole work of His grace.

We look back to the at glory the reformation the opening of the gates of the heavenly city prepared for the wife or church. The old and new are the same testament one the reviser the other submits, one work, one faith, One God

Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 1 Peter 1:8-11

2 Corinthians 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

John 10:27-28 - Who do you think the "sheep" are, if not the elect?

Attached is a good article on misrepresentations of Reformed (Calvinist) theology that are commonly employed by free-willers.

It seems like Christians would be more conscientious about representing others' beliefs even if they disagree with them. But, unfortunately, I've found that some Christians are not conscientious in this regard and deliberately misrepresent the theology of their opponents in some cases. In other cases, it's a matter of ignorance and repeating the claims of other ignorant men. Dave Hunt would be an example of one such individual.

Here's a very handy chart of Scriptural proof texts to the doctrines of grace (TULIP) related to Reformed (Calvinist) doctrine. I don't agree with every single reference, but the majority are decent.