Reformed Heresy

[Theo1689]

I'll ask you a question that will hopefully enable you to answer your own question to me. Do you believe that the elect are saved before they turn to Christ? If not, why? Didn't Christ die for their sin of unbelief?

Where does the Bible teach about "unactualized atonement"?
Please answer the question, and stop dodging.

 

[RCM]

LOL!!!!!!! We're all aware that you're trolling because you disregard the texts we exegete to show your errors. Why would anyone bother supplying you more texts only to have you not treat them at all and dismiss them altogether?

Show me your Biblical exegesis skills

Or do you think John is saying Jesus only made (created) those who are saved?


John 1:9-10, "There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him."

John first uses the word 'kosmos' in verses 1:9-10

Please explain how the bolded reference to John's use of 'kosmos' does not mean every single person without exception?



RCM

 

[Theo1689]

Please explain how the bolded reference to John's use of 'kosmos' does not mean every single person without exception?

No...

YOU need to show how "kosmos" allegedly DOES mean "every single person without exception".

We are NOT going to allow you to simply ASSUME your heretical meaning, all the while you DEMAND we "disprove" your unproven ASSUMPTION.

That's NOT how it works.

 

[CookedGoose]

The 'Day of Atonement' offering was for the whole Nation of Israel

I think RevRv knows more than me on this topic but I don't think this is right.

I think you're referring to the OT scapegoat.

 

[RCM]

John 10:11,15 for starters is the proof he so blindly cannot see.

Does not address the tenet's of 'Limited Atonement' that Jesus' death did not address the sin of Adam that led to the fall of all mankind


RCM

 

[RCM]

I'm sorry you believe the devil is "only partially defeated" (YOUR words).

We believe the devil is COMPLETELY defeated.

So, you agree that Jesus' work on the cross dealt with 'the sin' in the singular of Adam (Romans 5:12) that led to the fall of all mankind as the Apostle John declared He would do in John 1:29?

The only way that the devil is completely defeated is that Jesus righteously regained on the cross everything Adam legally lost in the garden!




RCM

 

[Theo1689]

So, you agree that Jesus' work on the cross dealt with 'the sin' in the singular of Adam (Romans 5:12) that led to the fall of all mankind as the Apostle John declared He would do in John 1:29?

What part of "I have no desire to have a discussion with you" don't you understand?

The only way that the devil is completely defeated is that Jesus righteously regained on the cross everything Adam legally lost in the garden!

Thank you for proffering your OPINION.
I guess you missed the part where I never ASKED for it.

Now please stop harassing me.

 

[squirrelyguy]

If He propitiated sins on the cross, and He propitiated sins for whole world (ie. every single person)
Then universalism is inescapable for you.

Sounds like you'll deny it but your doctrine demands it.

Unless you believe that you were saved before you even heard the gospel, then it seems to me that you don't think that universalism is an inescapable consequence of a universal atonement either.

 

[CookedGoose]

John 1:9-10, "There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him."

John first uses the word 'kosmos' in verses 1:9-10

Please explain how the bolded reference to John's use of 'kosmos' does not mean every single person without exception?

John 12/19 You see that you are gaining nothing, Look, the world has gone after him."

Please explain how "world" means every single person.

 

[Howie]

Unless you believe that you were saved before you even heard the gospel, then it seems to me that you don't think that universalism is an inescapable consequence of a universal atonement either.

@squirrelyguy gibberish ^

 

[ReverendRV]

Unless you believe that you were saved before you even heard the gospel, then it seems to me that you don't think that universalism is an inescapable consequence of a universal atonement either.

He's a Sola Fidest, so he doesn't think he was Saved before he Believed; right?

You believe he believes he was Saved before he Believed; right?🤔

 

[squirrelyguy]

Where does the Bible teach about "unactualized atonement"?
Please answer the question, and stop dodging.

You have a habit of putting certain ideas that you wish to disbelieve in quotes before asking people to show you where the Bible teaches it. I'm guessing this is your way of making sure you aren't contradicted since (as you know), the words "unactualized atonement" don't appear in Scripture. But neither do the terms "total depravity", "unconditional election", and so forth. But of course, proving an idea from Scripture does not require us to show the existence of the idea using the name given to it by academics. But I digress.

What you refer to as "unactualized atonement" follows logically from the fact that nobody is saved before they even hear the gospel. Do you dispute this?

 

[squirrelyguy]

He's a Sola Fidest, so he doesn't believe he was Saved before he Believed; right?

You believe he believes he was Saved before he Believed; right?🤔

I don't know if he does; I'm saying that it would be a logical consequence of his beliefs if he did believe he was saved before he even heard the gospel. Since he believes that the atonement already covers all sins for the elect for all time, without any need to actualize the effects of the atonement by faith in the recipient, the above characterization follows of necessity. He himself characterizes a belief in universal atonement as leading inescapably to universalism.

 

[Howie]

You have a habit of putting certain ideas that you wish to disbelieve in quotes before asking people to show you where the Bible teaches it. I'm guessing this is your way of making sure you aren't contradicted since (as you know), the words "unactualized atonement" don't appear in Scripture. But neither do the terms "total depravity", "unconditional election", and so forth. But of course, proving an idea from Scripture does not require us to show the existence of the idea using the name given to it by academics. But I digress.

What you refer to as "unactualized atonement" follows logically from the fact that nobody is saved before they even hear the gospel. Do you dispute this?

@squirrelyguy gibberish ^

 

[CookedGoose]

Does not address the tenet's of 'Limited Atonement' that Jesus' death did not address the sin of Adam that led to the fall of all mankind


RCM

So unless the atonement covers every single one of Adam's descendants it means Adam's sin is not addressed at all?

Is that what you're saying?

 

[ReverendRV]

I don't know if he does; I'm saying that it would be a logical consequence of his beliefs if he did believe he was saved before he even heard the gospel. Since he believes that the atonement already covers all sins for the elect for all time, without any need to actualize the effects of the atonement by faith in the recipient, the above characterization follows of necessity. He himself characterizes a belief in universal atonement as leading inescapably to universalism.

He's a Calvinist; he can't accidentally believe in the Banned Topic...

 

[RCM]

RCM said:

So, you agree that Jesus' work on the cross dealt with 'the sin' in the singular of Adam (Romans 5:12) that led to the fall of all mankind as the Apostle John declared He would do in John 1:29?

What part of "I have no desire to have a discussion with you" don't you understand?

Thank you very much for your complete non-response and complete inability to respond with Biblical Scripture


Not once in your whole complete discourse on 'Limited Atonement' do you provide Biblical Scripture that addresses this issue

Reformed Limited Atonement doctrine is based on this issue, and there is absolutely no Biblical Scripture that supports that Jesus did not deal on the cross with Adam's sin that led to the fall of all mankind



RCM

 

[Howie]

... Since he believes that the atonement already covers all sins for the elect for all time, without any need to actualize the effects of the atonement by faith in the recipient ...

A straw man.

 

[CookedGoose]

He's a Sola Fidest, so he doesn't think he was Saved before he Believed; right?

Right, as per my sanctification process.
But the golden chain is still infallibly golden

 

[Theo1689]

You have a habit of putting certain ideas that you wish to disbelieve in quotes before asking people to show you where the Bible teaches it.

I'm sorry if you don't like that I'm averse to believing things not taught in the Bible.

I'm guessing this is your way of making sure you aren't contradicted since (as you know), the words "unactualized atonement" don't appear in Scripture.

You said (and I quote), "The atonement is not actualized until it is received by faith."

So later the atonement is "actualized", so prior to that it is implied that one has "unactualized atonement". I'm simply asking for Biblical proof.

But neither do the terms "total depravity", "unconditional election", and so forth.

I see... You're going to apply the "Trinity" argument, which is basically used to try to justify believing in concepts nowhere found in Scripture.

The difference is that I've never tried to CONVINCE you that TD or UE are true, so they are irrelevant to this discussion.

But of course, proving an idea from Scripture does not require us to show the existence of the idea using the name given to it by academics. But I digress.

I never asked you to show the exact words.
I'm simply asking you to show the CONCEPT.

What you refer to as "unactualized atonement" follows logically from the fact that nobody is saved before they even hear the gospel. Do you dispute this?

Your definition is meaningless.

Are you claiming that the residents of hell have an "atonement" that remains "unactualized"? If so, I ask you to prove it.