That is wise. There are real dangers in viewing Scripture through the lens of any man's teachings, whether Calvin, Arminius, Molina, or the originator of Open Theism.
Don’t do it. You’re correct in your view. His discussion of Hebrews 10 completely disregards the OT context (Exodus, the consecration of the tabernacle, vessels, and people). Hebrews 9 tells us how to think about this. Some people can be set apart by the Blood of the Covenant, though not eternally saved. 1 Corinthians 7:14 confirms this. The saving work of Christ’s blood saves some, but it does much more than that. The problem is that most Presbyterians can’t answer the rather shallow but understandable objections that Baptists and Lutherans bring up. We often think of Calvinism in terms of 5 points, which is a rather American (Baptist) way to think.
Bible verse used for those interested... 1) People who fall away after being bought by the blood of Christ. Time 2:09 Hebrews 10:29 Time 3:30 2 Peter 2:1 parallel Jude 4 Other mentions of being bought by Christ without reference a to price. Rev 5:9, 14:3-4. 2) Universal nature of Christ's saving work. Time 5:47 1 John 2:2 Time 7:20 1 Timothy 2:4, 4:10 3)Limited atonement incompatible with free offer of Gospel. Mainly a logical argument calling into question the honesty of the free offer if the atonement isn't made for the non elect. 4) Book of Hewbrews. "Read my book" Deals with context of the book and arugement the book presents as Christ as a better sacrifice than the Old Testament sacrificial system. 5) Word of Jesus Time 15:00 Luke 23:34 view blog textual issue. Time 15:50 Judus treatment Lord's Supper Luke 22:1-23, John 18:2 (I think this is the reference) question about if Judus was at the Lord's Supper. Time 16:40 John 17, John 17:12 I hope this is useful.
How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he (Jesus?) was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? Hebrews 10:29 How could that contextually make sense?
@@calvinpeterson9581 It can only make sense, when one realizes that Paul is here speaking to Hebrews that understood the atonement (in Gen.3:15) was referring to Christ Jesus, and then went back to offering animal sacrifices, rejecting God's true Offering for sin (Heb.9:25,26, 10:10, 13:8,9,20).
@Andrew C Limited Atonement would only incompatible with the free offer of grace if Jesus hadn't died in any sense for every individual. Could you not say that Jesus died on the cross in order that the curtain of the temple was torn in two so that everyone could enter?
@@mikeschmoll7762 Mate I was just summarising the arguments made in the video. I'm theologically reformed and have been for sometime, I enjoy learning from different traditions. Thanks for the reply 3 years later.
@@acaswell84 Thanks for summary. Really helpful. The gospel is not an offer. It is a proclamation or a declaration of the person and work of Christ FOR His people. Gospel is the power of God unto salvation. Nobody can share POWER.
This RU-vidr gets my like every time. Always worth listening to. I lean somewhat to Calvinism, so hearing what a Lutheran has to say is a breath of fresh air. That’s a very nice looking Bible, BTW.
Dr. Cooper- I have been thoroughly enjoying your thoughtful and charitable description of Theology. It has been great to hear a Confessional Lutheran that offers a direct explanation of the Faith being both direct and kind. Kudos! Could you give an explanation of the contrast of the 2 wills of God as was described in the General Call of the Gospel & Limited Atonement and the Hidden God(Deus Absconditus) and Revealed God( Deus Revelatus) in terms of God's work in Election? Thanks again. Keep this coming!
As a molinist arminian, i do think, that there exists this possibility simply because the whole biblical data supports it by so far. Even in the old testament, we see the condition of salvation. 2. Peter 2:1 is one of the powerful verses that shows this in the new testament and most of the prophets, with the book of exodus, leviticus, numbers and deuteronomy
If not limited why some are going to hell,??? I am sure tjat those in hell are not save, or God's death on the cross were not suffient,so since not in heaven therefore limited,,
Many calvinists support some form of unlimited atonement, even Calvin himself in several of his writings. With that said I agree that Dort Calvinists or those that adhere to the Westminster confession have drifted inadvertently away from John Calvin. The satisfaction of Christ was certainly for all men, yet the effect is limited solely to believers, since the propitiation Christ made was for all men through faith in his blood. So we can say that the atonement was for all men and demands faith to be of any benefit, or alternatively we can say the atonement was for believers alone, since they alone have faith and have received it, the rest are cut off from it through unbelief. This is why scripture in many cases states that Christ died for the sheep or the Church, and in other places that he died for the whole world on condition of faith. In short the atonement ent is both unlimited and limited. Calvin and Luther and all the Reformers clearly understood this, but somehow today we have this silly controversy whether it is limited or u limited, it is both.
Hello Dr. Cooper. Thanks for this video- I was wondering if you know of any writing in direct response to Owen's work, the death of death? I was hoping to find someone to interact with his arguments and thoughts. Thanks!
Can you explain then, what Jesus was saying in John 6 and John 17? John 17:2 "As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life TO AS MANY AS THOU HAST GIVEN HIM." John 17:9 "I pray for them: I PRAY NOT FOR THE WORLD, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine."
He came for the elect. How do you figure that He is talking about Israel only??? So the Father has given Him only the Jews? His death on the cross was to atone the sins of the "world" and not just Israel (Jews).
Transformation of the Bride The Book of Life is over. It happened in Revelation 21. All prophecy was fulfilled in 70Ad at the destruction of Jerusalem. Www.anewdaydawning.com
Dr Cooper how do you reconcile these verses in John with your explanation of Hebrews 10:29? 6:36But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. 6:37All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. 6:38For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 6:39And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
Thanks for the video. Personally,, I think you did a great job. A trend among the comments is that everyone is confident and in their own interpretations of Scripture (whether they have a PhD or no theological education at all.) If the locus of hermeneutical authority resides in an individual, how could anyone ever have any confidence in his/her interpretation of Scripture?
Yes as i am preaching in conferences... this truth is needed to distribute to minister who are unable to understand the truth.. in this generation the ministers with limited atonement is increasing.. if atonement is limited is the love of God is limited for some people? i am working on this by our conferences.. I like to request all of you to pray for our work to preach 100% truth.. unlimited love,, unlimited atonement, but human have the limited access in to this.. let us pray..
@@marktownsend7367 this is an old comment - Dr. Cooper doesn't hate Calvinists but he does promote his Theology in a Polemical manner. Which is fine so do I. I believe Lutherans are wrong about Universal Atonement. That's not hatred.
I’m a true believer and I haven’t fallen away. God has always brought me back every time I stray. The Good Shepard watches over the flock and when one goes astray, he goes looking for them and brings them back. Don’t worry, if you did accept Christ as in believed with your heart and confessed him as lord. You are saved, period. A true believer will actually always be brought back. Because Christ knows his sheep and he will not lose even one of them.
The most simple way I have explained the validity of T.U.L.I.P is in terms of a chain link. You take away one point and try to examine apart from the other four utilizing individual texts rather than a systematic theology, then you can only logically argue with one point (as there are many isolated verses that seem to contradict various soteriological beliefs). E.g., its impossible to examine what systematic theologians (Calvinists) refer to as "limited atonement" without first explaining what you believe about the natural condition of man, i.e. Total or Radical depravity which scripture fully attests to the fact that we are "dead in trespasses and sins" and then God "makes us alive together in Christ" through the gospel, Hallelujah! Therefore, because man is so corrupt with "pervasive sin." it takes the miracle of regeneration to make him right with God (in our justification and granting of faith, repentance, etc. as a gift). If atonement is unlimited, then the ability for man to repent or "come to God" necessarily grants eternal life to the power or "will" of man, making the cross of no effect if he has any moral capacity at all within him to choose to believe the gospel (which he doesn't). Therefore, if the atonement were unlimited, then all would come since man possesses moral ability to do so and salvation is not of grace but ultimately of works. If atonement were limited in the sense that all men are corrupt and "no one seeks good," then it corroborates that the substitutionary death of Christ is required for the salvation of at least some. Sovereign grace...Not to mention when Paul -explicitly- speaks of "election" and "predestination." You have to do something with it.
God's will is for everyone to repent. I believe that is noted in scripture multiple times in different ways and phrases. However, sadly everyone doesn't. My question is the following: Does that mean Gods will is not strong enough for everyone to repent? I think we know the answer. Just like every contract both parties must accept the agreement. If one party doesn't it doesn't mean the other party was not willing or able. I don't know why people will be against the idea that God is so merciful and able to forgive the sins of the world as opposed to a limited few. I'm interested why you view this differently
@@marcofigueroa9296 He views it differently because as he already described (using your analogy of a contract agreement) the sinner receiving the contract has no desire due to their fallen nature to accept this agreement, they are a slave to their love for sin and so enemies of God(dead in spirit) by nature. This is why the Gospel is of Gods Grace(unearned favor) because (1) Its not earned by us but given by God. (2) We could not earn it ourselves because we are corrupted and have no desire for the righteous things of God.
The strongest argument for Calvinism is this. When applying the same methods of interpreting scripture we use to come to the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the resurrection, justification, etc. to the topic of predestination/election, it brings us to monergism (which includes Calvinism, but also Lutheranism and Amyraldianism). This method is starting with passages specifically addressing the particular doctrine of interest, then interpreting passing phrases through these passages. An example would be in arguing the deity of Christ to a Jehovah’s Witness. It wouldn’t be the best choice to argue that Jesus is God from a passing phrase in a passage about a different subject. But if we start with Hebrews 1 or John 1 and walk through the text, following the authors argument (which in those passages is to reveal Christ’s deity), then we are able to walk alongside the author and start with the clear, then interpret passing phrases in light of those. So when we read that Jesus is man, we already have found out that He is God so we can rightly understand He is both God and man. When applied to this subject, we start with Romans 8-9, Ephesians 1-2, and John 6, all of which specifically discuss the topics of soteriology, election, and who can come to Christ. We then interpret difficult passing phrases such as 2 Peter 3:9 (this chapter is primarily about eschatology, not election) and 1 Timothy 2:4, 1 John 2:2, etc., verses which seem on the surface to contradict Paul’s argument in Romans and Ephesians and Jesus’ argument in John. Examining those verses in light of what scripture specifically says about predestination through consistent hermeneutics disarms the synergistic interpretation, and allows God’s Word to interpret itself, showing a beautiful and majestic consistency of scripture, showing once again that Scripture is truly divine.
There are tensions in all theological systems; Calvinist, Arminian, Lutheran etc. One could easily argue that your Lutheran idea of sovereign election, that God predestines only the elect for salvation, and that it is not based on any foreseen faith or works but entirely on God's choice and grace, creates two contradictory wills of God when contrasted to your universal view of the atonement. So God wills the salvation of the elect alone on the one hand and also wills and desires the salvation of every human on the other? Huge tension there I don't see any contradiction between the free offer of the gospel and Particular Redemption. The Reformed view makes more sense than the Lutheran view
Jesus said he Draws ALL menwhen he is lifted up-just as the bronze snake was liftedthat whosoever belived would not be condemmed!! Jesus chose judas didnt he,how was he lost then?
@@bobfree1226 Jesus said Judas was the "son of perdition." He wasn't meant to be kept. He was used as what Romans 9 would call a vessel meant for dishonorable use. God, the Potter, has every right to make what He wishes out of the clay.
@@Stanzi18 Show me where it says that. ALL the apostles were Chosen. Saul was chosen as first King of Israel -look at what evil he did.Again men were Chosen for Service NEVER for Salvation. the Calvanist premise is wrong.SO many scriptures show this.
@@Stanzi18 ACTS 30-18 read it -here Paul states that GOD Command ALL men Everywhere(strong Greek) to Repent.an then underscores it all by saying God appoints the times n places for ALL men And HE did that so man might SEEK and find Him,yet HE is NOT Far from anyone of US!!
Question, how do you make sense of what seems like disunity within the Godhead when it relates to a universal call? The Father gave a people to Christ, The Son died for all people (those lost as well as those that were given by the father), and The Spirit is trying to woo all people but omg effectively winning those who are saved.
Someone in opposition to you would argue disunity in the godhead the other way. The father foreknew and predestined those who he would save. (The elect) The son was sent to absorb the holy wrath of God and take the punishment for the sins of the elect. The spirit enters into and works within the lives of those the son has died for.( The elect) I agree that there is unity within the godhead but you can’t just assume what the unity is and then say that if you change one of those characteristics then you disrupt unity. Prove to us that what you said about each of the members is what they actually do. I’m just as guilty of assuming here I’m just using as example. For example, find me scripture where it says the spirits job is to constantly try and woo the non believers. I don’t think it exists. If the spirit constantly try’s to woo unbelievers he must be pretty bad at his job huh?
While I disagree with you on this issue, I have to say some of your arguments did give me something to think about. Particular redemption is a tough doctrine, but it seems to me to make the most sense in light of Christ’s purpose in the atonement in Hebrews and the connection between intercession and the atonement in Roman’s 8. Still, this is a secondary issue that has the potential for us to enjoy Christ more through the study of it. God bless 🙏
Perhaps the best, most civilly presented rebuttal of Calvinistic Limited Atonement I have encountered on RU-vid. Your final point - Jesus's use of the word "except" during His High Priestly Prayer at the Last Supper ("I have lost none except, etc.") - I thought pretty much sealed the deal.
judas was chosen to fulfill his purpose in rejecting Christ. Jesus chose him knowing full well that he was never a believer. but a thief because he stoled money from the money bag that they carried, you find this in John when mary come to wipe Jesus feet with very costly perfumed. Jesus said also in John, that I chose the 12 of you, yet one of you is a devil, he was chosen to full fill what was written. If Jesus died for the sins of all men, then why could God not get the gospel to those who died never hearing about the one who paid for there sins? was God not able to get the gospel to those who Jesus died for? when they stand before God will they not ask God why He was not able to get to them the gospel of there potential salvation? would not God be unjust to send them to Hell knowing full well that there sins were paid for, but God was not able to get to them there gospel of there salvation. that is a God who is not sovereign. that is a very weak God. a god who is not God.
john dennis Jesus may have chosen Judas knowing Judas would betray him, but the question I have is Did God foreordained Judas to betray Christ? In other words, did God decree Judas's lack of faith and betrayal, so that Judas really had no choice, or did God know beforehand that Judas would freely reject and betray Christ and incorporate it in His plan?
judas was chosen by Christ so that scripture would come to fulfillment, God the father did not work in the Heart of judas, so that he would come to believe in Christ in the same way that peter did, when peter confessed to Christ that He was the Holy one of Israel, and the Christ told peter that it was the Father that revealed that to his Heart. God was at work in all 11 of them. But God left judas to his own godless beliefs. and to his own destruction. for the natraual man can not understand the things of the Spirit. judas was never given a new Heart.
Judas was loved by Jesus and always will be. Yesterday, today and for all ages. Judas also loved Christ and would not have comitted suicide due to such extreme guilt if he had not. This article may help you all see it. brianzahnd.com/2013/03/betrayed-by-a-kiss/
Brett S.- How can God of loved Judas in when Romans 8:28-29 says NOTHING can separate us from the Love of God. Judas is in Hell in torment and faces the wrath of God as so are all unbelievers. Does God still love them?
In the bread of life passage in John 6, Jesus explains that He came down to accomplish the will of the Father which is to lose none of all those who He gave to the Son and this seems to be referring to all believers because He sums it up in verse 40 by saying, "For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.” It sounds as if this is referring to salvation and the everyone/all in this passage is referring to the total group of believers who will be saved on the last day. But in John 17 it seems that in verses 6-19 Christ is praying specifically for the disciples because He switches in verse 20 to praying for those who will believe through their word. So the focus has switched and the sense that Judas is lost is not as a sheep. Judas was also put in the same category as those who didn't believe and stopped following Him in John 6. I'm still learning though.
John 1:13 hits the heart of the matter becoming God’s child right on: “who were born.... nor the will of the flesh, nor the will of man, but of God.” Cut and dry God alone.
Paul F yup God alone after man freely believes. You’re conflating faith with being born again. Born again happens AFTER you believe and it’s 100% God and 0% man. Can I ask you why you conflate the two when it’s cut and dry that they are two completely different events?
Road to Reformed Wrong. You cannot be born again before you’re justified. Period. There’s no dancing around that. It doesn’t matter the context of any passage this fact remains true. It doesn’t matter the Hebrew or the Greek or the English or the Chinese this fact will remain true. It doesn’t matter the Bible translation if it’s KJV, ESV, NASB, NIV, NLT or the Message this fact remains true. We’re justified by FAITH and not before faith so it’s scripturally impossible to be born again before you believe in Christ.
Road to Reformed 1 JOHN 5:12 is crystal clear that you have NO LIFE until you have the Son and the only way to have the Son is through FAITH: 1 JOHN 5:12 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God HATH NOT LIFE. And yet you’re claiming to have life BEFORE the Son so that you can then afterwards believe??? 1 JOHN 5:12 is directly against you on this.
@@apilkey faith is a gift. It's granted to us. Who grants It? God. A dead man can't have faith. Faith comes because a new heart has been given to exercise faith. Read Ezekiel 36. After we have been spiritually quickened we can put our faith in Christ. We believe because God opens our eyes. He justifies us when we believe yes. But how and why do we believe? Because God granted it to us. So no matter how you want to Pelagianize it - God gets all the glory. Even for man believing- even that is God's doing.
Great Video, Jordan. Would you mind doing a video on Romans 9? I'm pretty aware of the Reformed exegesis of the chapter, but I haven't seen much from a confessional Lutheran perspective.
Jordan Cooper will never do a lutheran exegesis of Romans 9 because he would have to admit to limited atonement. I love Luther when he wrote in his commentary of Romans 9 that God died solely for the elect: “A second objection: 'God will have all men to be saved' (I Tim. 2:4), and he gave his Son for us men, and he created man for the sake of eternal life. And likewise: Everything is there for man's sake and he is there for God's sake in order that he may enjoy him, etc. But this objection and others like it can just as easily be refuted as the first one: because all these sayings must be understood only with respect to the elect, as the apostle says in II Tim. 2:10: 'All for the elect.' Christ did not die for absolutely all, for he says: 'this is my blood which is shed for you' (Luke 22:20) and 'for many' (Mark 14:24)-he did not say: for all-'to the remission of sins' (Matt. 26:28)” (Wilhelm Pauck [ed.], Luther: Lectures on Romans [Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006], p. 252; italics original. Pauck correctly adds this as a footnote to the third sentence: “Augustine, Enchiridion, XXVII, 103” [n. 66]).
Bill K By your logic we would conclude that Jesus only die for the Apostle Paul and no one else because in Galatians 2:20 Paul says that Christ gave Himself for him. GALATIANS 2:20 20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and GAVE HIMSELF FOR ME. So does that mean Jesus never died for anyone else? Of course not.
@@apilkey I think there is A time to clearly state Christ Died solely for believers or the elect because scripture says that in many passages. Only believers partake in the benefits of the atonement. Only believers are justified in God”s sight. With that said it can also be said that Christ died for all men and atoned for the sins of all men, but in order to benefit from this universal atonement man must have faith, this is why scripture has verses where the atonement is clearly limited to the church or to believers, and other verses where the atonement is expressed in a universal form.yet always on condition of faith. Let us not forget that apart from faith nobody has his sins atoned for, because as Romans 3:25 states the propitiation Christ made was through faith in his blood. So speaking of the atonement as a finished work apart from faith is certainly unbiblical. The atoning work of Christ is a complete finished work that demands we receive it in faith in order to be of any value to us, so it is a conditional satisfaction, faith is necessary for the atonement to become effectual in our lives.
Bill K Yes I agree 100% you have to RECEIVE the Atonement by FAITH. You said: “think there is time to clearly state Christ solely for believers or the elect because scripture says that in many passages. “ Reply: This is a false statement nowhere in a scripture does it say Christ “SOLELY” died for believers or the elect. You’re adding to God’s Word by inserting your own word “solely” when there’s not a single passage of a scripture that says that. Scripture clearly says He died for the elect. Your ASSUMPTION is that this means “solely” the elect. Scripture also clearly says He died for Paul. By your logic this also means He “SOLELY” died for Paul.
@@apilkey now come on here,we can say Christ died for all men on condition of faith. Who meets the condition ? Believers only. So it is perfectly biblical to say that Christ died solely for believers. Do all for whom Christ die go to heaven ? Absolutely, to state otherwise is to deny the atonement is effectual in all those for whom .christ shed his blood. The only way you can get away with a universal atonement for all men is by stating that it must be received by faith, Christ did not die for anybody that does not receive the atonement. 1 Corinthians 15:3 clearly states that Christ died for our sins, but Paul is referring to the sins of believers alone, in the previous verse he 1 Corinthians 15:2 he makes it very clear that the effectualness if the atonement or the validity of it (whether it is for you or not) hinges on whether a man has faith or not. Romans 8:4 clearly states that Christ”s satisfaction was for those that walk after the spirit but not for those that walk after the flesh. If you walk after the spirit, the atonement is for you, if you walk after the flesh the atonement is not for you and Christ did not die for you. The atonement must be received by faith which you agreed, so the atonement is limited solely to those that have faith, as Romans 8:4 clearly states. The atonement is limited to believers, that is indisputable in scripture, and as I said this so because it’s efficacy is contingent on faith, i.e. whether we believe in Christ and have received the atonement.
I understand that making an offer that isn't available to all may be seen as being "dishonest " as the Dr. said,what I struggle to understand is Salvation is a gift , as is faith , God grants repentance and faith to the elect as a gift , is it then" dishonest "for God to offer salvation to all and yet only gift some with it ? That is if the same reasoning is followed , it seems this " dishonesty " is unavoidable , or am I missing something ? God cannot lie , so something isn't quite right in suggesting that if it is particular redemption it would involve dishonesty on God's part
Really good video. Well stated. I have struggled with the Armenian vs Reformed viewpoints but I agree with you... the Bible just doesn't support limited atonement and preservation of the saints.
I have to say that I disagree with most of your points, though some are very valid points. For example, 1 John 2 does indeed teach that it is not just for Jews, but also the Gentiles. Go to John 11:51-52 and you will see the same wording there, and the terms are defined. Same author, same idea, different wording. "Not for that nation only" makes it very clear who John speaks of in both works.
The writer of Hebrews is speaking to the Elect/Believers and instructing them (Early Church/Christians) to leave the principles of the doctrine of Christ, and let us go on to perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from Dead Works (sacrifice of bulls and goats). The writer is teaching them (Early Church) that Christ Alone is sufficient in His Once and Only Sacrifice. The "All" in Timothy is of every kindred, tongue, tribe and nation (see Rev. 5:9). The "World" is the orderly arrangement - Kosmos. Jesus said, I give my life for My Sheep. The False Prophets in II Pet. 2:1; are the ones that Deny that He gave is life for His Sheep i.e. The Elect.
1 Samuel 3:14 God said “Therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever.” That's Limited atonement. John 17:9. Jesus doesn't pray for the non elect. Romans 9:11-23.
John 17 . Christ says that He's not praying for the world but for HIS own. you have to be consistent with your exegesis. so what do you do with Romans chapter 5 when it says that all will be justified? In Adam all died but in Christ all will be justified. If you're consistent with your ex of Jesus then you would have to teach universalism, that all will be saved.
I thought you said you were a Monergist? I just need to get educated on Litheranism. Because if you say that you believe God alone saves someone but that person in their own power can then undo God's saving and transformative work, rendering God a liar - then I don't see how that's Monergism.
I just don’t understand Luther putting such an emphasis on Christ work on the cross justifying those who believe without coming to the point of limited atonement. You can’t have both it’s illogical. It’s either does Christ justify or does Christ give you the opportunity to justify yourself? Does Christ only justify many but He atones for all? Every time the work of Christ justification is mentioned on the cross it almost exclusively says many. “As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities.” Isaiah 53:11 “just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”” Matthew 20:28 “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”” Mark 10:45 If it is Christ who justifies you simply can’t believe in universal atonement. That means Christ justified all on the cross and everyone will be saved. “For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.” Romans 5:19 Again does the fall now give us the opportunity to become sinners or did it make us sinners at birth? Did Christ obedience give us the opportunity to become righteous are does it make us righteous. If you believe christ makes righteous and it’s Christ who justifies then how can you possibly believe in universal atonement because then it would be Christ justifying literally everyone and everyone would be saved. “even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.” John 10:15 Here we have Jesus saying he died for the elect only. The gospel of the reformed is penal substitution which is undeniably taught in Isaiah 53 and other passages. If Jesus death and on the Christ satisfies the wrath of God in place of sinners then logically you have to believe in limited atonement. If Jesus death satisfies the wrath of God for everybody then everybody has salvation. Lastly when the Bible says Jesus died for all it’s in the context of the time. They are trying to make it clear that Jesus or the Jewish messiah paid for the sins not just for Jews but all kinds of people. This is why we see Paul say “who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time. For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying) as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.” 1 Timothy 2:6-7 “a renewal in which there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all. So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience;” Colossians 3:11-12 We see in the Gospel Christ ransoms many but Paul says he ransoms all. Not Paul isn’t saying he is a ransom for every single person but he is a ransom for all kinds of people not just Jews and is not contradicting the gospels.
In Matt. 12:31 Jesus says that those who blaspheme the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. Why would he say that if he was planning on dying for their sins ?
What about Hebrews 3:14 14We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly to the end the assurance we had at first. This sounds like if one doesn't perservere then they were never saved.
Super late to the party here I know, but with the analogy you use with buying the TV, I don't think that quite correlates because God is outside of time and God knows (and determines) who will say yes so you need to change the analogy. A better analogy is offering to buy everyone a TV and then only purchasing the TV for the people that say yes. God operates outside of time so this is entirely logically consistent and not problematic at all and the criticism doesn't apply at all.
I listen to points like these to challenge what I believe but I then think, even if I did agree with Unlimited Atonement, the reason I even hold to Limited is not because I simply think Jesus came to save a unique group of which i am apart of, as to allude to some superiority complex etc., but due to the landscape scripture provides for us, that (1) sinners on earth are described as being blinded, as being slaves to the sins they commit on a continual basis, romans 3 speaks of no man being righteous or seeking the things of God, let alone God Himself. What do we say then to total depravity in regards to this? None can stand without the other and there is no way I am going to succumb to the idea of mans free will being the determiner of said salvation, this idea God has stepped back and allowed a flawed creation to determine an outcome when it is already stated they are (1) corrupted, (2) enemies of God due to this corruption (3) Not able to earnestly repent without the Grace only God Himself can bestow by way of Holy Spirit. This then circles back around, who is really in control of a persons conversion? It is God. God receives all the glory and it truly is Grace(unearned favor) because man had literally no part in achieving that justification. So this conversation is more than just limited or unlimited, it goes into calvinism vs arminianism, these are two perspectives of God that operate quite differently in regard to mans destiny.
Also, verses like Romans 11:4-6 make no sense when u apply unlimited atonement. Unlimited atonement relies on a pagan concept of what “free will” is(this secular concept excludes bondage of sin) and basically makes salvation of individuals a thing of chance in regard to if they will receive & keep faith or not. This ignores Gods sovereign election, foreknowledge, Gods keeping of His saints, etc. There is absolutely nothing left up to chance, nothing beyond Gods decree. This is not to say we do not have volition, but it is to say that our purposes & positions as Gods creations vary and are not based upon ourselves but Gods Will. Romans 9 speaks of this sovereign action of God: Him as the sculptor & us as the clay.
Romans 5 : 18 tells us that the free gift unto justification of life is offered to all who were condemned by the offense of one judgement ( Adam's sin ) . Does ALL mean ALL concerning who was condemned because of sin ? That same ALL has been offered the free gift unto justification of life in romans 5 : 18 , so why do calvinist deny that this biblical passage is true ?
@@lindajohnson4204 so it does because you placed an exception, which that exception is what we are talking about by how Arminianism limits the atonement.
@@sirsmiter1115 The exception is the one the Bible makes. So we're not just talking about a philosophy from wherever, or being the philosophers who evaluate the philosophy. We're talking about the word of God, and Jesus's atonement is for all, but it is effective for all who receive it.
@@lindajohnson4204 _but it is effective for all who receive it_ Right so it's only effective for the elect, which is what Calvinists affirm. The issue then becomes did Jesus pay for the sins of people who end up in hell, and what does it mean to "pay for sins" if people still end up damned?
@@choicemeatrandy6572 It means something like "light has come into the world, and MEN preferred darkness, because their deeds were evil". If you define elect as "they who believe", then those who believe are the elect, according to your definition. But nothing in scripture suggests that God has not put forth the effort to get the others to believe. In fact, God cannot lie; He cannot be insincere. So when Jesus draws ALL men to Himself, John 12:31-33, He CANNOT be insincere about ANY of His drawing. If He draws them, they CAN come. That makes salvation contingent on whether they come or not, because if He draws them, He sincerely wants them to come. So Jesus wasn't crying "crocodile tears" when He said "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often *WOULD I* have gathered your children, like a hen gathers her chicks under her wing, and *"YE WOULD NOT".* "WOULD I" = I would vs "YE WOULD NOT" If Jesus said He wanted to draw them to Himself, He was not lying. But if God had not wanted them drawn to Jesus to be saved, Jesus would have been lying. That's how seriously twisted this doctrine is.
So, do you believe in universal salvation where every soul who ever lived will be in heaven (including murderers and blasphemers) or do you believe that the atonement is only effective if humans first meet God's requirements?
David... consider this balanced revision of the "L" in the acronym TULIP in accordance with the scriptures and not logic alone. -Total Depravity (all fall short of God's righteous law inwardly & outwardly) -Unconditional Election (God will apply the merits & righteousness of Christ) -Limitless Atonement (all including the elect are atoned for via God's decree) -Immanent Grace (saving faith is ever present in the gospel of God's grace) -Provision & protection for the saints (God providentially protects, directs, and nourishes the saints thru word & sacrament) Enjoy!!
@@Gablesman888 1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:1-2, KJV) 10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. (1 Timothy 4:10, KJV) 14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: 15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again. (2 Cor 5:14-15, KJV) 34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him. 35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. 36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (John 3:34-36, KJV) BTW- Hell is not empty according to scripture, sir.
How far away lutherans have embraced the arguments of Erasmus against Luther in the Bondage of the Will is hard to believe, and they have completely departed from what Luther taught. That God ought to have purchased salvation and redeemed a particular person, otherwise God is offering what he does not have is absolutely unbelievable. One thing I agree with Jordan Cooper that this is the argument of the hyper-calvinists, and lutherans agree with hyper calvinists that if God has not redeemed a man he cannot offer salvation to that man, otherwise God is a liar or not genuinely offering salvation. Frankly this is exactly what Erasmus was telling Luther, and if this was true, God cannot sincerely expect man to obey the law perfectly because man does not have the ability to do so. Let's make this clear. 1) Luther clearly taught in the Bondage of the will, against Erasmus, that God can and does all the time command man to do things that God knows man can not do. God tells man to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, but does not give to most man the ability to believe. Jordan Cooper has completely forgotten this, and now has come dangerously close to state that God cannot have a contradictory will, and command a man to believe in Jesus Christ but at the same time not give him the ability to believe because this would make God insincere. Jordan is taking Erasmus position and arguing against Luther himself, who clearly taught that God's command to man to believe does not imply that God will give man the ability to believe. God seriously expects man to do things without giving man the ability to perform them was Luther's argument against Erasmus (and Jordan Cooper, may we say, since he has taken the position of Erasmus) 2) Calvinists, as Jordan Cooper acknowledges, teach that the gospel is freely offered to all men. Jordan Cooper also agrees that Calvinists teach the atonement is sufficient for all, i.e. if God had so intended it, it would have sufficed to save every man that believes. Again, this is all God needs to offer the gospel freely to all men, the offer is grounded on the sufficiency of the atonement for all men as just outlined. Christ payment is sufficient to pay for the sins of every man, had God so intended it, so God has in the sufficiency of the atonement everything needed to freely offer the gospel to all men. The only thing that God refuses to give man is the ability to believe to all men as Luther taught in the bondage of the will, and this he rightfully does. This was the whole argument of Luther against Erasmus, lutherans today have taken Erasmus side unfortunately, while Calvinists stand by Luther. God is not a liar or a deceiver (as Jordan Cooper states) when he offers the gospel to people whom he does not give the ability to believe nor has he made satisfaction for their sin. All that is necessary to offer the gospel to all men is the infinite value of the atonement, the payment made by Christ is of infinite value (sufficient for all), and on this premise and solely on this premise the gospel is offered freely to all men. Even though very few men were purchased and redeemed by Christ, there is sufficient payment made to purchase and redeem the entirety of mankind had God so intended. The atonement in calvinism is solely limited in its intent, not its sufficiency. And as Luther taught in the bondage of the will, God does not intend to save all men, only the elect are given the ability to believe and are taught of God the gospel. In short lutherans = Erasmus, Calvinists = Luther. Then again, Jordan Cooper will argue that Luther later on changed his mind, and in the bondage of the will he advocated double predestination when Luther brilliantly wrote : 'This mightily offends our rational nature, that God should, of his own mere unbiased will, leave some men to themselves, harden them, and then condemn them; but he has given abundant demonstration, and does continually, that this is really the case, namely, that the sole cause why some are saved and others perish proceeds from His willing the salvation of the former and the perdition of the latter, according to that of Paul, He hath mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth'
God designed His gospel for 'the meek' (Is.61:1, KJV) and gives grace to only the humble (1Pet.5:5). Salvation is God's alone to bestow, and Ps.149:4 is clear about whom are His elect. The LORD 'looketh on the heart' of all men and 'knows them that are His' (2Tim.2:19). Although men attempt to limit God, 'the Word of God is not bound' by their logic and reasonings (2Tim.2:9,10). Pride has always been 'the sin which doth so easily beset us' (Heb.12:1), being 'devilish' (Ja.3:13,15). Why else would Peter instruct 'all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility'?
@@billk8874 Jesus, our 'meek and lowly in heart' Lord Christ, bids us to 'learn of (Him)', Who is also 'the express image' of God our Father... Having received 'the love of the truth' and 'the engrafted Word in meekness', how can we not be saved? (2Thes.2:10, Ja.1:21, 1Pet.4:6-10). 'Hearing the Word, and understanding it' (Matt.13:23) does seem to increase our faith, doesn't it? Praise the Lord that He humbles us! (Ps.119:67,71,75)
Everything that happens in history has been decreed/Predestined before the world was created see Eph 1:11, Proverbs 16:33 and Amos 3:6. And yes even when terrible things happen, I know it's hard for some people to accept but look what happened when David sinned against God and one of Davids punishments was that God told him that he was going to use Davids own son to shame his Father by Absalom Absalom doing something immoral to his Fathers concubines in front of all of Israel, see 2 Samuel 12:11-12 God said "Thus says the Lord, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own household; I will even take your wives before your eyes and give them to your companion, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight. Indeed you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and under the sun." Notice how God said "I WILL DO THIS THING."That was fulfilled in 2 Samuel 16:21-22. Jesus did not die for every single person ever and Jesus didn't die to make people savable. He died to save his elect. In John 17:9 Jesus said that he does not pray for the world. The word world is used in different contexts, in that context he's talking about the non elect. In John 3:16 world means that he purchased people from every tribe, tongue and nation Rev 5:9 and for the children of God scattered abroad John 11:52. Some have been "long beforehand marked out for condemnation" Jude 4 and "appointed to doom." 1 Peter 2:8. About Pharaoh God said “For this VERY PURPOSE I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires." Rom 9:17-18. Jesus said "I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight. All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." Matthew 11:25-27. So, 2 Pet 3:9 the "not willing that any should perish" if you read that letter in context, 2 Pet 1:1 says "To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours." As far as salvation for all men verses, Paul was refuting the false notion of his time that God was only desiring to save just the Jews and 1 Tim 2:2 says to pray "for kings and all who are in authority" because as humans WE DON'T KNOW WHO THE ELECT ARE SO WE PRAY FOR EVERYONE! That's what it means in verse 4 by saying "all men." Amos 3:2 God said "of all the nations of the earth I have only known you." For centuries God passed over the majority of humankind because this verse isn't about knowledge it's about relationship. And it isn't because God foresaw Israel was more righteous then the other nations because sometimes Israel was more sinful then the pagan nations see 2 Kings 21:9. Only those who were predestined to be saved will be see Acts 13:48, Ephesians 1:4-5, Eph 1:11, Romans 9:11-23, John 6:37. 1 Samuel 3:14 God said “Therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever.” That's Limited atonement.
They were chosen to serve not to go to heaven; Jesus chose them to spread the word (bear fruit) and give ALL people a chance to be saved. With John 17:9 I say trying reading till 17:20 "I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe me through their word. That they may ALL be one
If you deny limited atonement and are not a universalist, do you believe that Jesus died on the cross for those going to hell? That does not make sense at all.
So you think every single person is bought by his death? That would mean everyone is going to heaven plus no one knows who the elect are that’s why god uses us to spread the gospel to get to the ears of the elect and they will come no one comes to the son unless the father draws him
One has to wonder why this division between the lutherans and the reformed on the atonement. It is my understanding that the only disagreement between Luther and Calvin related to the Lor'd's Supper. So this thing blows my mind, if Luther and Calvin were in agreement on the atonement, why this division today between the two traditions. I honestly think both sides are to blame for this. Calinists because they don't understand that the Theodore Beza / John Owen view of the atonement which appears to be the one reflected in the Westminster Confession and the Canons of Dort was not the position of Calvin himself nor the position of the early reformed confessions (Scots or Scottish Confession, first and second Helvetic Confessions, Heidelberg Catechism). Calvinism has become radicalized and divisive, and it has taken a position that neither Calvin nor the early reformed confessions took, by excluding those that believe in unlimited atonement,. Lutherans have done the same thing by attacking limited atonement, when in fact there are so many scriptures that teach that Christ died for the church or for those that would come to believe in his name, that it has gotten to the point that it is ridiculous. The atonement is one area where those that deny that Christ died in a special way for his sheep like the lutherans do, they have to suppress so many scriptures, that it leaves one with the impression that this people have walked away from the faith. But the same applies to the calvinist that goes the other extreme and denies that Christ has not died in any saving way for those that would never believe, there are way too many scriptures and Jordan has quoted them that point to a universal saving love of God who sent Jesus to die for the sins of the entire world and with his blood he purchased redemption for the entire human race. Both limited and unlimited atonement are biblical, Christ as Jordan points out from scripture is the Savior of all men but specially those who believe (he is not the savior of all men equally as lutherans teach though), Christ died in a very special way for the elect that he did not die for the reprobate, and lutherans by denying this biblical truth are being as divisive as the reformed. There were no divisions on the atonement at the beginning of the reformation, we need to get back to the consensus the early reformers had, that Christ died in a saving way for all men, but also that he died in a very special way for the elect that he did not die for those that have not been predestined in Christ since the foundation of the world. The interesting thing is that Augustine, Prosper, and Aquinas they all taught both limited and unlimited atonement, and explained in what sense Christ is the Savior of the World and it what sense He is the Savior of the Church. Today Calvinists teach that Christ has saved the Church but not the the entirety of creation, the whole world, and then we have Lutherans teaching that Christ has saved the whole world in the same way He has saved the Church. Both traditions (reformed and lutheran) have become radical and divisive to the point that both have taken unbiblical positions inconsistent with the teachings of Scripture and the Fathers, like Augustine, Prosper, and Aquinas which I mentioned and properly understood that the atonement is unlimited in the sense that Christ has redeemed the whole world, yet it is limited in the sense that Christ has redeemed his elect in a way that he did not redeem the rest of the World.. The early Refomers, both Luther and Calvin, had no disagreement on the atonement because they both followed scripture and the Church Fathers, unlike the lutheran and reformed tradition which chose to depart from Luther and Calvin.
Sorry to say but you're misreading 2Peter 2. The Lord there refers to Yawhew, not Christ, the title "Lord" used in that verse is never used for Christ. It's used as a commercial word which means a slave owner. 'Bought' refers to freeing Israel from Egyp by the Master/Slave-Owner, God. The descendants of those who have been freed are the ones being referred to here. They are enjoying the temporal benefits and blessings of their ancestors' freedom. Look at the context again of the chapter. It's an indictment of false converts introducing false teachings to the church. See vv 17 to 22, and their final end in v13.
The biblical picture of definite atonement looks more like this (following your example): Jesus bought a huge amount of gifts, so many, that He fills ten stadiums with them. After that, He tells the people that the Father sent Him, to be the "great gift giver" to undeserving people. He tells the people that there are more than enough gifts for all, and everyone who comes to Him will receive it. But He not only stays and waits, hoping that someone will come for the gifts, but also there are some people for whom he personally goes after, seeks them, finds them and gives them the gift. There is nothing dishonest about the behavior of Christ.
Máté Tóth That means that Jesus paid for the sins of all because there are gifts available for everybody. Limited atonement says there are not gifts for everybody, only for the Elect.
"Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing. But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man." John 2:23-25
Gill on Heb 10: *** It is not evident from what is said of these persons, that they were true believers; not from the apostles speaking in the first person plural, we, which may seem to include himself, who was a true believer, and a chosen vessel of salvation...
He obviously died for everyone but that only applies to the ones who get saved because if your not saved then he didn’t die for you but for people that accept him so I don’t see how this has anything to do with limited atonement it’s limited to the people that accept him not everyone will be saved
@@Gablesman888 He died for the sins of all people, as a propitiation: "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." But, you must receive this by faith: "whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith." Believe the plain Word. Don't buy the false prophets' wrangling of the Word.
Critique on your application of 2 Peter. It does not say that the Master bought them into the New Covenant. It simply says the Master bought them. There is nothing in the text that requires me to read in it that the death of Christ alone is ineffective to bring anyone to salvation, which is what you are presenting.
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them-bringing swift destruction on themselves. (1 Pt 2:1) If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,” and, “A sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.” (1 Pt 2:20-22)
Sir, if the atonement is not limited then everyone will be saved. But I don't think you believe that because scripture doesn't teach that. Plus why would Jesus die for those that would never bow down to Him? God the Father has to grant the saved repentance and if He doesn't then the person can't be saved.
If Christ died for the world, everyone would go to heaven. But see the problem is we have a lot in hell. So how do you explain that? Yes, I'm a calvinist and I believe what the Bible says in Ephesians and Romans and everywhere else that God talks about it
What Paul is talking about in second Timothy, saying that God wants all people to come to salvation, he can’t be talking about everybody in the world because we know that people go to hell, Jesus talk more about hell then he did heaven
On your assertion of DISHONEST CALLING you forgot that Christ said, "many are called but few are chosen". He calls all but he knows that from many just few are chosen.
That's a dishonest misuse of the parable. The Master was absolutely earnest in his invitation and hoped that all would come. He did not secretly pre-plan for the first invited not to come. *Ezekiel 18:23; 33:11* God wants all wicked to repent and live. *Luke 7:30* God's βουλή (plan/purpose/resolve/counsel) for the Pharisees was to accept them. But they rejected this βουλή of God for themselves, by refusing John's baptism. *1 Timothy 4:10; 1 John 2:2* He is especially the Savior of believers. He remains the Savior of all people. This makes the labor of evangelism and the reproach of scoffers bearable. He is the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the church AND the world. *John 1:29; 3:16* The lamb of God takes away the sins of the world. God loved the world. *Luke 8:13* Jesus asserts that some really do *joyfully believe* the gospel for a while, and actually *fall away* through trials and temptations. *Luke 11:13* Jesus is emphatic that the Father gives the Holy Spirit to anyone who asks. *Romans 11:32* Who does God have mercy for? Everyone whom he consigned to disobedience! *1 Corinthians 8:11* It is possible to destroy the saving faith of a brother for whom Christ died. *Eph **4:30* The Ephesians were sealed for the day of redemption, yet Paul warned them that the possibility of grieving the Holy Spirit was a reality. *2 Peter 2:1* Christ bought even the heretics who deny Him and destroy themselves. *1 Tim 2:1-6* Christ died for all people and wants all people to be saved. Therefore, Paul commands us to *intercede* even for godless kings and rulers. *Hebrews 3:1-12* Even "holy brothers and sisters" can "turn away from the living God" with an "evil, unbelieving heart." *Hebrews 2:1, 12:25* The author and the audience could reject God's warning and not escape. *Hebrews 6:4-6* It is possible for one to be enlightened, taste the heavenly gift, have the Holy Spirit, tasted the goodness of the word of God, and then fall away. *Ephesians 3:3-6; Isaiah 45:19* As God has revealed his secret will in scripture, it is always to extend greater mercy. *1 John 2:2* Christ is the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, not only for the church.
It's useless to think that spiritually dead people will ever call on GOD man is not wounded he's dead Jesus said no one CAN come to me unless the father brings them. It has to be granted.
*Ezekiel 18:23; 33:11* God wants all wicked to repent and live. *Luke 7:30* God's βουλή (plan/purpose/resolve/counsel) for the Pharisees was to accept them. But they rejected this βουλή of God for themselves, by refusing John's baptism. *1 Timothy 4:10; 1 John 2:2* He is especially the Savior of believers. He remains the Savior of all people. This makes the labor of evangelism and the reproach of scoffers bearable. He is the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the church AND the world. *John 1:29; 3:16* The lamb of God takes away the sins of the world. God loved the world. *Luke 8:13* Jesus asserts that some really do *joyfully believe* the gospel for a while, and actually *fall away* through trials and temptations. *Luke 11:13* Jesus is emphatic that the Father gives the Holy Spirit to anyone who asks. *Romans 11:32* Who does God have mercy for? Everyone whom he consigned to disobedience! *1 Corinthians 8:11* It is possible to destroy the saving faith of a brother for whom Christ died. *Eph **4:30* The Ephesians were sealed for the day of redemption, yet Paul warned them that the possibility of grieving the Holy Spirit was a reality. *2 Peter 2:1* Christ bought even the heretics who deny Him and destroy themselves. *1 Tim 2:1-6* Christ died for all people and wants all people to be saved. Therefore, Paul commands us to *interceed* even for godless kings and rulers. *Hebrews 3:1-12* Even "holy brothers and sisters" can "turn away from the living God" with an "evil, unbelieving heart." *Hebrews 2:1, 12:25* The author and the audience could reject God's warning and not escape. *Ephesians 3:3-6; Isaiah 45:19* As God has revealed his secret will in scripture, it is always to extend greater mercy. *1 John 2:2* Christ is the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, not only for the church.
YHWH in the old testament according to calvinism: Israel why are you doing this evil I wanted you to do and not turn back to me although I made you to be hard towards me! New testament Jesus: Ol Israel if only you would have done what I wanted you to do even though I gave you total depravity to not be able to listen!!!??? Doesnt make sense to create a person to rebel and then plead for them to repent does it?
@@ethanhocking8229 That salvation cannot be lost, we never know that. Only God knows. When a baptized christian denied Christ, it means that he was never saved before. When a non Christian confesses and is baptized, we Will never know whether he confess from the heart or not. That is the way Calvinist thinks.
@@alajxandro1907 No, that’s not the case. We can be sure of our salvation for as long as we are pursuing our enjoyment of God - as He has revealed Himself in Scripture. Loving God is how you know you’re a Christian. And the more you love God, the more you desire to do things that glorify Him.
The Tv exemple is not accurate, you said that the persone wants the TV, but the Bible says that sinners are dead in their trapasses before coming to life Eph 2.2. Also, you cannot know that the sinner does not want the TV, again, the sinner is dead and does not realize his need for salvation. So, the offer of the gospel is not deshonest. The Bible calls us to offer the gospel to all and everyone and it's their responsability to accept or reject the offer, God is ultimately sovering and brings to life those who He predestined Ephe 2
I don t remember seeing the worst argument ever than John 17, 12. John 17:12 While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. According to pastor Jordan interpretation, Jesus practically failed to guard Jude. Is this the truth: John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. John 17:9 I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours. There is a very nice verse that explains many thinks about Jude and others that were involved in plot against Jesus. Acts 4:27 for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, Acts 4:28 to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place. John 6:70 Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.” John 6:71 He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the Twelve, was going to betray him. All other arguments are very well known and are not so problematic to explain. I , really, was expecting much more from the pastor.
One more thing. Rev 1:7 Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen. The verse above explains what is going to happen with people that crucified Him.
The natural man always resists the gospel and hates the light. The Father chooses to give eternal life to some. “In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will!” Ephesians 1:11 The Son died for the elect and was raised from the dead. “I lay down my life for the sheep....You do not believe because you are not my sheep. John 10:15, 26 The Holy Spirit, in time, regenerates the elect and they receive the gift of faith. “We were by nature deserving of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions-it is by grace you have been saved!” Ephesians 2:3-5 Jesus says: “Assuredly I say to you, the one who believes in me has everlasting life.” John 6:47 Belief equals everlasting life. A person cannot stop believing and bearing fruit because everlasting life never ends by its very definition. “Being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus!” Philippians 1:6 No contradictions with the correct Biblical theology. Lutheran view splits the very nature of the one God and the work of the three persons. This is an infinite serious problem. Lutheran view contradicts the first two Lutheran points with its last three for which you admit not having an answer. There is no answer to a contradiction. God does not contradict himself. The non-elect go to hell no matter if you call it single predestination or if the Son dies for them. Plus why would Jesus die for people in hell? He doesn’t. Jesus came to effectively die and save the elect as he says: “And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day!” John 6:39
Before Christ the Jewish nation was the elect, although some fell in the desert and became corrupt, also some gentiles were saved.. rahab. After Christ's atonement the gentiles became the elect, although many reject Jesus, and some Jews who believe in Jesus are save. Predestination speaks of God's plan to bring salvation to the world.
I wrote a book that presents a new model and middle ground perspective between the Penal view and Christus Victor. I call it Perfectus Liberatio. In short the wrath of God is not directed AT Christ, but operates THROUGH Christ. God’s wrath is his moral perfection being revealed against all that is contrary to moral perfection. Christ is the sinless Lamb. Thus God can transfer all sin upon his sinless Lamb and condemn it as being in the wrong-in the sinless perfection of the Son. For sin was unable to accuse, condemn or to lay a charge against the Son for any wrongdoing. Like trying to stick the barbs of Velcro onto a smooth mirror, sin cannot attach itself to the Son- for the Son offers no “hooks” for sin to grab hold of. Therefore because sin cannot justify its presence in the Son, the Father’s wrath is able to condemn sin as being “in the wrong” IN THE SINLESS perfection of the Son. Like pouring a vile of deadly bacteria into a bucket of pure bleach, the bacteria does NOT infect the bleach. Rather the bleach destroys the bacteria. In the cross the sinfulness of sin is undone by the sin-less nature of the Son. The wrath of God is the basis by which sin is condemned THROUGH the Son. But the Son is NOT being condemned (Rom. 8:3). There is more to say. Feel free to buy my short, 100 page book that begins with a parable story to prepare you for the later commentary on the atonement. Go to Amazon and type either my name or “The Fall and Redemption of Shadowmere.” Peace
You could anything with a verse out out context. You have to remember the scriptures say the ones who persevere to the end the one save , not the one’s that taste it. Matthew 24:13 . 1 John 2:19 say that many left the church. The but they were not of us. Meaning they were not truly converted. That goes to say many can benefit from the church and God as well with the fellowship but truly not be converted and go back out to the world. You see this in the Old Testament and New Testament in the Israelites as well in the church today. Total Scriptural!!.
*Luke **7:30* God's βουλή (plan/purpose/resolve/counsel) for the Pharisees was to accept them. But they rejected this βουλή of God for themselves, by refusing John's baptism. biblehub.com/greek/1012.htm *Luke **8:13* Jesus asserts that some really do *joyfully believe* the gospel for a while, and actually *fall away* through trials and temptations. *Luke **11:13* Jesus is emphatic that the Father gives the Holy Spirit to anyone who asks. *Eph **4:30* The Ephesians were sealed for the day of redemption, yet Paul warned them that the possibility of grieving the Holy Spirit was a reality. *2 Peter 2:1* Christ bought even the heretics who deny Him and destroy themselves. *1 Tim 2:1-6* Christ died for all people and wants all people to be saved. Therefore, Paul commands us to *interceed* even for godless kings and rulers. *1 Timothy **4:10**; 1 John 2:2* He is especially the Savior of believers. He remains the Savior of all people. This makes the labor of evangelism and the reproach of scoffers bearable. *Hebrews 3:1-12* Even "holy brothers and sisters" can "turn away from the living God" with an "evil, unbelieving heart." *Hebrews 2:1, **12:25* The author and the audience could reject God's warning and not escape.
"Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?" Hebrews 10:29 NKJV The problem here is that you're assuming that it is the person who has committed apostasy who is being referred to as the one that was sanctified by the blood, but it can and mostly likely refer to the Son of God. Christ himself prayed to the Father that he would be sanctified. "And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they also may be sanctified by the truth." John 17:19 NKJV Also the grammatical structure of Hebrews 10:29 supports this. Notice that the Son of God is mentioned right before the statement "by which he was sanctified". So the word He is referring to the Son of God and not to the apostate. "...the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified..." So it is Christ who was sanctified and the apostate is guilty for trampling the Son of God underfoot and counting the blood of the covenant, by which Christ was sanctified, a common thing. This verse teaches nothing about universal atonement. As for 2 Peter 2:1 The context is about false teachers who will bring in destructive heresies. And whom God will judge. Note that Peter is not teaching about the sacrificial death of Christ. So this text is most likely being used out of its context by those who use it to teach universal atonement. "But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction." II Peter 2:1 KJV One of the destructive heresies that these false teachers will be teaching is to "deny the Lord who bought them". Now the teacher of universal atonement will say that the word "Lord" here refers to Christ but upon examining the Greek we find that it refers the God the father. The Greek word here is δεσπότης despotēs "Lord" and it always refers to God the Father. So the redemption of Christ is not in view here. So these false teachers are denying God the Father who had bought them. The term bought is used here but it is not in reference to the work of Christ but God the Father. God the Father is said to have bought Israel in the old testament, for example "Do you thus deal with the Lord , O foolish and unwise people? Is He not your Father, who bought you? Has He not made you and established you?" Deuteronomy 32:6 NKJV Peter is most likely referring to this kind of "bought" since it is God the Father who is in view here. So this verse can be ambiguous and should not be used other than to teach about false teachers because the work of Christ on the cross is really not mentioned here at all.
Another example of the inability to rightly divide the Word of God when hindered by an over arching motivation to defend the autonomous free will of man, and to represent God Almighty in the image of fallen, self serving man.
Jesus said he will Draw all men-an that he will not lose anyone that the Father gives him. Yet judas was chosen and drawn, how did jesus lose HIM? There is a lot in this statement. many pray to GOD in this world and do Not know Jesus.But that does Not mean they cant be saved! all the old testament people did not Know Jesus . Paul says we ALL have the Light of Conscience and the Light of creation so no one has an excuse.And when a person responds to that Light,God gives him the Light of Christ! Cornelius was a perfect example.he was praying to GOD , and did not Know jesus ,but as soon as he heard peter say who jesus was,instantly the Holy spirit fell on him and only THen he spoke in tongues!!! He was not as many calvanists say Regenerated before ,Peter was astonished and finely said ,i see God is no respector of Persons!! an again shall we refuse him the Water!
That point is exactly the one why I wouldn't ever be a reformed (calvinist). I'm a methodist pentecostal but I feel very near to the lutheran and anglican tradition 💙🙌
Finally to say that Christ lost one of those that God the father had given him is to make Christ a liar. Because he himself says... "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day." John 6:37-39 NKJV He specifically says "that of all he has given me I should lose nothing". Judas was destined to be lost. He was not among the number of those who had been truly given to Christ because if he was then he would not have fallen away. Lest we make Christ a liar.
The problem is you don’t define your biblical words in Old Testament Hebrew and New Testament Greek! A man has nothing to do with his own salvation it all comes from God! All people was the all believing church in Ephesus!
