Jesus atoned for the sins of the whole world

Carbon

Carbon

Well-known member
TomFL said:
Show where you answered my specific questions

John 12:47 (KJV)
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

according to the text why does Jesus not judge any who do not believe ?

Based on that what is the relation of the unbeliever to the world ?

and originally who did Jesus come to save in the world (according to the text)

and then compare

John 3:16-17 (KJV)
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Click to expand...
🥱
 
J

Johnnybgood

Well-known member
Theo1689 said:
First of all, I think you should show this post to Seth (after he comes back from "vacation") to show you're not a Calvinist, as he falsely claimed.

Of the five points, Limited Atonement (or particular redemption) seems to be the most difficult to accept, but both sides seem to agree that the 5 points either stand together, or fall together.



I refer you back to my post about "all men" and "world", and the fact that the ancients didn't so much think in terms of "individuals", but in people "groups" (eg. JEWS, and GENTILES).

Refer back to Rev. 5:9, and ask yourself whether the "every" (a form of "all") refers to the individuals, or to the people GROUPS:

Rev. 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying, “Worthy are you to take the scroll
and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed
people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation,

"ransomed people FROM each of these groups...



While we should recognize the wisdom of Godly men before us, we can't be afraid to disagree with them when we think they're wrong. I'm sure we could find other scholars who studied the Greek directly, who you disagree with. So with scholars on both sides, what do we do? We have to disagree with SOMEONE, no matter what.

Let me ask you.... What is your position on water baptism?:

a) paedo-baptism (infant baptism);
b) credo-baptism (believer's baptism)?

I am thoroughly convinced from Scripture that credo-baptism is the Biblical way. They have to believe in Christ before they can confess Him as their Saviour. Yet Calvin was a believer in paedo-baptism, and Barnes, a Presbyterian, presumably also believed in paedo-baptism.

Do you agree with them on this point as well, or do you disagree?
Click to expand...
So far I’m undecided of the limited/unlimited debate because I can see both sides . Can it be a paradox and both somehow are true and valid kind of like the Jesus two nature that se like a paradox but both are true?
 
J

Johnnybgood

Well-known member
Theo1689 said:
One the points I was trying to make was that there are reasonable interpretations to these passages by Calvinists as well.

Again, "world" in some instances simply means, "not just Jews (as a group), but Gentiles (as a group) as well. Not that everyone in each group was atoned for, but there are those in all groups (Rev. 5:9) who will be ransomed.
Click to expand...
Thank you it’s a very complex idea to resolve for me. I’m going to kept my mind open for the time being and not make any haste decisions one way or the other until I have given it more time studying this in depth.
 
P

praise_yeshua

Well-known member
Terry43 said:
Dont ask " Common sense " questions
Click to expand...

Do you believe it is sin to reject Jesus Christ?

Have you read the book of Hebrews?

Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Heb 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

I'm sure you prefer your Calvinist of choice instead of embracing the Scriptures for what they say.
 
T

TomFL

Guest
Carbon said:
🥱
Click to expand...
Exactly

you can't

Show where you answered my specific questions

John 12:47 (KJV)
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

according to the text why does Jesus not judge any who do not believe ?

Based on that what is the relation of the unbeliever to the world ?

and originally who did Jesus come to save in the world (according to the text)

and then compare

John 3:16-17 (KJV)
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
 
T

TomFL

Guest
Johnnybgood said:
That is interesting thank you .
Click to expand...
Reference John 12:47

The reason Christ does not judge any unbeliever is because he came not to judge but save the world

It therefore becomes obvious the term world includes any unbeliever

These Jesus came to save

John 12:47 (KJV)
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

now compare with the parallel John 3:17


John 3:16-17 (KJV)
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
 
T

TomFL

Guest
Theo1689 said:
First of all, I think you should show this post to Seth (after he comes back from "vacation") to show you're not a Calvinist, as he falsely claimed.

Of the five points, Limited Atonement (or particular redemption) seems to be the most difficult to accept, but both sides seem to agree that the 5 points either stand together, or fall together.



I refer you back to my post about "all men" and "world", and the fact that the ancients didn't so much think in terms of "individuals", but in people "groups" (eg. JEWS, and GENTILES).

Refer back to Rev. 5:9, and ask yourself whether the "every" (a form of "all") refers to the individuals, or to the people GROUPS:

Rev. 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying, “Worthy are you to take the scroll
and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed
people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation,

"ransomed people FROM each of these groups...
Click to expand...

Rev 5:9 does not use the terms all men or world

it speaks of those who were actually redeemed - those who received the application of the atonement through faith .
It does not address who the atonement is available for - the extent of the atonement

You assume the atonement applies its own benefits- it doesn't it must be received through faith
 
T

TomFL

Guest
Johnnybgood said:
So far I’m undecided of the limited/unlimited debate because I can see both sides . Can it be a paradox and both somehow are true and valid kind of like the Jesus two nature that se like a paradox but both are true?
Click to expand...

As Theo was informed

Rev 5:9 does not use the terms all men or world

it speaks of those who were actually redeemed - those who received the application of the atonement through faith .
It does not address who the atonement is available for - the extent of the atonement

You assume the atonement applies its own benefits- it doesn't it must be received through faith
 
Last edited by a moderator:
R

Reformedguy

Well-known member
TomFL said:
Exactly

you can't

Show where you answered my specific questions

John 12:47 (KJV)
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

according to the text why does Jesus not judge any who do not believe ?

Based on that what is the relation of the unbeliever to the world ?

and originally who did Jesus come to save in the world (according to the text)

and then compare

John 3:16-17 (KJV)
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Click to expand...
So in Romans 1:8 does world there mean every last single person who has ever lived? Had every last person heard of their faith?
 
T

TomFL

Guest
Reformedguy said:
So in Romans 1:8 does world there mean every last single person who has ever lived? Had every last person heard of their faith?
Click to expand...
Why are you diverting

The context concerns John 12:47 not Romans 1:8

Words have a range of meaning

and context determines the particular meaning in its context

If you avoid the context you offer but a pretext
 
R

Reformedguy

Well-known member
TomFL said:
Why are you diverting

The context concerns John 12:47 not Romans 1:8

Words have a range of meaning

and context determines the particular meaning in its context

If you avoid the context you offer but a pretext
Click to expand...
Words have a range of meaning? Really? So world does not have to mean every last person who ever lived? Who knew right?
 
T

TomFL

Guest
Reformedguy said:
Words have a range of meaning? Really? So world does not have to mean every last person who ever lived? Who knew right?
Click to expand...
You mean you did not know

Have you never looked at a dictionary or a lexicon ?

Who know - most everybody but you

Address the context of the proffered verse
 
R

Reformedguy

Well-known member
TomFL said:
You mean you did not know

Have you never looked at a dictionary or a lexicon ?

Who know - most everybody but you

Address the context of the proffered verse
Click to expand...
Which offered poroffered verse? Your a proof texter

By the way you did not answer my question. Was their faith proclaimed to every last person who ever lived in the first century?
 
Ken Hamrick

Ken Hamrick

Active member
To say that a man’s sins have been atoned for but the atonement has not yet been applied, is like saying a house has been painted but the paint just hasn’t been applied yet. Atonement is an OT concept, and the word there actually means to cover as with paint. Hint: when were your sin-stained robes washed in the blood of the Lamb?That is atonement; and there is no way to separate it from “application” and stay true to the biblical concept. Another hint: find one example in the OT where anyone was atoned for without faith.
 
T

TomFL

Guest
Reformedguy said:
Which offered poroffered verse? Your a proof texter

By the way you did not answer my question. Was their faith proclaimed to every last person who ever lived in the first century?
Click to expand...
John 12:47

Your question is irrelevant as context determines the meaning in each case

Your verse is an example of hyperbole, so no not literally every person

that does nothing at all to change the meaning of world in John 12:47 and other text

So if you want to actually deal with the meaning in John 12:27 and other soteriologically sensitive verses

you will actually have to exegete them and not run to irrelevant examples
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top