The problem with limited atonement isn't "world" the problem is "not ours only".

@iamtheteapot7405

2 жыл бұрын

Amen

@rdrift1879

Жыл бұрын

Exactly. That was a long way around the barn answer that didn't address the text.

@OC3707

8 ай бұрын

Who's the "ours" refer to?

@user-bj1ve3pg7h

7 ай бұрын

Thanks

@friarcharles22

7 ай бұрын

“I pass by the dotages of the fanatics, who under this pretense extend salvation to all the reprobate, and therefore to Satan himself. Such a monstrous thing deserves no refutation.” - Calvin on 1 John 2:2

Calvinist definition of whosoever = the elect, all = the elect, everyone = the elect, and now, the world = the elect. I pray that God will remove the scales from their eyes.

The text literally says, that Jesus is the sacrifice for the sins of the WHOLE world, ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου. Similarly 1 Tim 2:4 says that God wants ALL men to be saved, ὃς πάντας ἀνθρώπους.

@barrygaynor1025

2 жыл бұрын

All men: Jew and Gentile.

@billyr9162

2 жыл бұрын

That's correct but hilosmos is a noun. Not a verb. It's what he is. Not what he did.

@andrewlawrencei3239

2 жыл бұрын

God not saying that’s God want everyone to become save , only those He choose or elect all over the world.

@andrewlawrencei3239

2 жыл бұрын

@@barrygaynor1025 not everyone only those He elect

@growingtruedisciples

2 жыл бұрын

Great point!

Genuine question to my Calvinist brothers: what would you need the text to say to believe the Scriptures were teaching an unlimited extent of the atonement?

@davevandervelde4799

4 ай бұрын

That is a good question. The problem is that we believe what the text "is" saying. John is saying that God is not selecting only Israel the save , but now, the whole world. Jesus death is the propitiation for the sins of those who put their faith in Him. No man is excluded from calling upon God, the gate of salvation is set open unto all men: neither is there any other thing which keepeth us back from entering in, save only our own unbelief. ...John Calvin The atoning work on the cross can not be applicable for everyone since not everyone believes. It is limited to believers. The offer of the gospel is unlimited .

This interview is a great example of why the proponent of limited atonement cannot, in good faith, offer Christ’s salvation to the world. An evangelist who affirmed LA could never appeal to these passages in their evangelistic preaching. You could never say “Christ died for your sins” because you aren’t sure that Christ has actually paid for that sinner’s redemption. As such, the doctrine remains esoteric and hidden only in the mind of God, discernible only in retrospect.

@Raynisha1120

Жыл бұрын

Yes we can say he died for our sins and yes the Holy Spirit can affirm the work of the spirit through the lives of other believers. Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever. “We give thanks to God always for all of you, constantly mentioning you in our prayers, remembering before our God and Father your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ. For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake. And you became imitators of us and of the Lord, for you received the word in much affliction, with the joy of the Holy Spirit, so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. For not only has the word of the Lord sounded forth from you in Macedonia and Achaia, but your faith in God has gone forth everywhere, so that we need not say anything. For they themselves report concerning us the kind of reception we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.” ‭‭1 Thessalonians‬ ‭1‬:‭2‬-‭10‬ ‭ESV‬‬

Is not that difficult. When John says “And he is the propitiation for our sins“, that means to the already saved. But when John says “and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world“. That means the elect of every tribe and nation who’s not yet saved. That’s what the video implies also. 1 John 2:2 is tied with John 3:16.

@NC_27

2 жыл бұрын

I'm kinda confused 😅. Is it possible to be elect without being saved? Can those two states be separate?

@garyjames6267

2 жыл бұрын

Thomas, You telling me something is not difficult does not make it right nor easy to believe. Referencing John 3:16 does not prove anything. That actually supports the idea of everyone not some. So the Pharisees said to one another, “You see that you are gaining nothing. Look, the world has gone after him.” (John 12:19 ESV) is a good example of the word world does not mean everyone since it is obvious the Pharisees (among others) were not going after Jesus. However, 1 John 2:2 needs to be grappled with. It is difficult which is why a very learned and experienced pastor could not easily explain the original question, how can limited atonement and 1 John 2:2 be reconciled. It is my understanding this was some sort of off-the-cuff question and answer time. The time is very limited. Tough question for this format. But God is able to bring good from his response and all of these discussions. My only aim in all my comments throughout these discussions is to promote us all to be willing to think. God’s ways are not man’s ways. It takes reading, studying, debating, meditating and praying to understand God’s life giving revelation. Thanks for the input.

@2timothy23

2 жыл бұрын

@@NC_27 I think Thomas Glass is speaking of the elect from God's perspective. When you're a Christian, you are certainly the elect of God. Yet an unsaved person can still be elect from God's perspective (think Ephesians 1:4) though they haven't come to repentant faith. Think of Jesus' words in John 10:16 when He says He has other sheep that are not of this fold (speaking about the Jews) that He would also bring (and that they would hear His voice). Later in John 10 He says, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." (John 10:27-28) You have not only the assurance of salvation in those John verses, but the promise that those sheep would hear His voice and follow Him because He knows them. And this is before they have come to faith. They belong to Christ before hand, hence His sheep. But also notice John 10:26, where Jesus says to His audience, "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." Notice the cause and effect. They don't believe because they are not of Jesus' sheep. They don't belong to Him (given to Him by the Father as shown in John 6:37-44); therefore they don't come because they won't come. So, yes, you can be elect of God while you're still unsaved because there will be an appointed time where you will hear the gospel by a sent Christian and come to faith (Romans 10:14-17).

@NC_27

2 жыл бұрын

@@2timothy23 Thanks for that explanation. 🙏

@davidpatton7298

2 жыл бұрын

yes sir. The issue is that fallen man hates with ferocity the ultimate sovereign rule of His creation. To be dependent upon a purely holy, and all powerful being for salvation; the means to survive His wrath upon any rebellion whatsoever, with zero merit, is frightening and savagely humbling to the self loving, arrogant rebel.

Not even close to an answer that reconciles that verse 1 John 2:2

Thanks Pst. Derek Thomas *4 Answer This Powerful Question of "How Can We Reconcile The Doctrine of Limited Atonement With 1st John 2:2 ?" Where I Say That I Disagree With Pst. Derek Thomas When He Says That 1st John 2:2 Which Says "& He Is The Propitiation 4 Our Sins & Not 4 Ours Only, But Also 4 The Sins of The Whole World" Where I Say That When Our Great LORD Jesus Christ Told Nicodemus John 3:16 Which Says "4 God So Loved The World That He Gave His Only Begotten Son That Whatsoever Believes In Him Should Not Perish But Have Everlasting Life" Where I Say That The Whole World Refers 2 Every Race, Tribe, Colours & Nations 4 It's Not That We Loved Him But That He Loved Us That He Became The Propitiation 4 Our Sins 4 We Love Him Because He First Loved Us Written In 1st John 4:10 & 1st John 4:19 4 The World Refers 2 Every Tribe, Race, Colour & Nations 4 Our Great LORD Jesus Christ Did Not Come 4 The Righteous But 4 The Sinners Written In Matthew 9:13* & May Our Great Almighty God Bless Yu Pst. Derek Thomas & Ligonier Ministries So Very Much.

Sadly, though the New Testament speaks in so many verses and diverse contexts about God's love and saving desire for all men, calvinists, not because of exegesis but because of theological presuppositions distort most of those to mean that God loves and truly desires only some men to be saved.

I (sarcastically speaking) like how he does not say what the text really means but rather what it DOES NOT mean (to support his calvinist perspective) ...very circular reasoning if you ask me as his biased beliefs requires of him to interpret the text in that manner..

@5552515

Жыл бұрын

Yeah his example made no sense whatsoever in context to this scripture. "The world doesn't mean the whole world." but that's why the text says the whole world.

@Garthant

Жыл бұрын

Words are ambiguous. They have more than one meaning. the word "world" means a lot of different things. It can mean the sinful world system. It can mean the geographic area that had been civilized at the time. It can mean literally every single individual. It can mean all tribes tongues and nations. It's not circular reasoning to ask the question: "Which meaning of the word _world_ is being used here?"

If we understand the verse in the context of First John, there is no difficulty. First John is addressing Gnostic views. Good study (good exegesis) is necessary and helpful; taking Scriptures out of context creates problems.

@garyjames6267

2 жыл бұрын

Help me out. How does the thought 1 John is addressing gnostic views solve the Calvinist dilemma of limited atonement and Jesus being the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. Thanks.

@lentner3

2 жыл бұрын

@@garyjames6267 perhaps and I haven’t given this lots of thought yet but on the surface it looks like it is referring to the gift is offered to all. Lest they hear and believe? What do you think?

@thomasglass9491

2 жыл бұрын

@Gary James Is not that difficult. When John says “And he is the propitiation for our sins“, that means to the already saved. But when John says “and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world“. That means the elect of every tribe and nation who’s not yet saved. That’s what the video implies also. 1 John 2:2 is tied with John 3:16.

@barrygaynor1025

2 жыл бұрын

@@garyjames6267 First John is inspired. The ideas John Calvin presented about 1500 years later are not.

@barrygaynor1025

2 жыл бұрын

@@thomasglass9491 "Our" refers collectively to the authors of First John, writing on behalf of the congregation ("We write these things to you"; and, "you", refers to those who left the congregation for Gnostic teachings), whom they were inviting back to the congregation, in order that their joy may be complete. Of course Christ's atonement applies to all: Jew and Gentile.

I used to hold to limited atonement. I reasoned that because all of salvation is God's doing, the implications of unlimited atonement were completely unacceptable in that whether or not the atonement was efficacious would then depend on the individual. Not to mention, how could people go to hell if Jesus payed the price? But I was overthinking it! The problem is the way I understood "payment", being understood as "so much of this will purchase so much of that". But that is not the case with the atonement. I was seriously overcomplicating it, when it really is very simple: Jesus Christ offered Himself as a sacrifice for sin. It's not like the degree of suffering was greater the more sin He took upon Himself, or that it took an x amount of blood for an x amount of sins. He was simply slain - a one time offering for all sin. Whether or not this offering is efficacious depends on whether or not a person comes to Christ, and whether or not a person comes to Christ is dependent upon whether or not they are chosen by the Father. There is no reason to complicate things. This does not mean that Jesus merely died to make salvation possible. He obeyed the will of God, died as an offering for all sin, and knew the result would be salvation for His sheep. Therefore, the sacrifice was not limited in it's redemptive potential. On the contrary, it's scope was universal - one sacrifice made for all sin. But the redemptive effects are limited by the election of God the Father and NOT by human acceptance/rejection. This is why 1 John 2:2 means exactly what it says, and in no way conflicts with total depravity and unconditional election.

@lukejacobson9373

2 жыл бұрын

I love this

@intothekey

Жыл бұрын

I think you still believe in limited atonement. Unless you believe Jesus died for every single person you believe in limited atonement. Can you define what you mean by it's unlimited in scope? Do you mean in power and effectiveness?

@Garthant

Жыл бұрын

I think that's a very good explanation, and it's still limited atonement. Another way this concept has been stated is that the atonement is sufficient for all, but efficient for the elect.

@samuelrosenbalm

Жыл бұрын

@@Garthant I was wrestling with these concepts at the time I made that post, and I had only just started going to a reformed church. And reading this now, I was actually surprised that I didn't recognize this view as complete 5 point Calvinism, though I obviously hold to that now. Jesus Christ called me to salvation in 2018 but it was in a pentecostal church, and then in 2019 I had a moral lapse, and went back to living in sin though I feared God and kept my faith free from apostasy. And it was in a state of rock bottom that I became intimately acquainted with my own inability, and God allowed me to understand that because of my sinful wretchedness, I could play no part whatsoever in my own salvation, and that it was all His doing. And He also opened my eyes to a lot of the error in pentecostalism. So when I was converted by God's grace I went to a reformed church. Though I will say, the church I came from had a lot of people who I believe are saved, and I count them as brothers. But I have disagreements with what is taught there and would not want to disrupt the local body. I think the worst thing they teach is that a person can lose true salvation. I learned what a good thing for me that a person cannot, and that even a backslidden state has no power over the One who overcame the world. And that neither sin nor death hath any power over the one for whom Christ died, and that he whom the Son hath set free is free indeed.

@Garthant

Жыл бұрын

@@samuelrosenbalm amen brother, that's a powerful testimony.

What does whole world mean? If you’ve never been to china you’ve not been all over the WHOLE world as 1 John 2:2 declares.

Romans 9-11 has a very happy ending: "God has consigned all to disobedience, that He may have mercy on all. … From Him, and through Him and to Him are all things." (Romans 11:32,36a)

2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2:2 He could not accurately say that he has been around the WHOLE world as the verse says. The way he explains the text doesn't fit because he forgot to explain the WHOLE world part. He just tried to explain world. If he wants to give a better explanation he will have to deal with the word whole.

😂😂😂 I like how you guy's try to twist God's word to fit into your doctrines. The world means every single person no such thing as God predestine some for heaven and others to hell. God is not willing that any should perish. If you don't believe that then you don't know the character of God.

@growingtruedisciples

2 жыл бұрын

Whole means whole. Great point!

@jrbuenconsejo5912

2 жыл бұрын

I like how you easily conclude something just by scratching the surface. You read your bible like it was written first in english. I suggest you learn greek and syntax (proper exegesis as one might say) so that when you interpret a verse, passage or a chapter, you interpret it based on what the exact context is saying, not based on your preconceived opinion. You are telling us that we are twisting God's word to fit into your doctrines but here you are telling a doctrine that suits your biased doctrinal interpretation. Reading the Bible is different from understanding and studying it. Don't just look around the seas, but dive deeper.

@growingtruedisciples

2 жыл бұрын

@@jrbuenconsejo5912 why are you assuming the guy who write this comment doesn't know Greek and syntax just because he comes to a different understanding of the Bible than you? I get that you think we are wrong, but you don't have to assume that people are uneducated just because they come to different conclusions than you. All I'm saying is that we should be careful with our judgments brother. The truth is, the guy who wrote this comment could have every qualification you think he should have and still come to a different conclusion. It's just kinda insulting to assume this kind of stuff about people without really knowing them. Granted the original guys comment is kind of insulting as well (assuming foul motives on you all part (twisting scripture to fit doctrines)... it's possible that people just really believe a particular doctrine is true. They may not be intentionally scripture twisting). We all can get better about talking with people who we disagree with.

@jrbuenconsejo5912

2 жыл бұрын

@@growingtruedisciples "why are you assuming the guy who write this comment doesn't know Greek and syntax just because he comes to a different understanding of the Bible than you?" I'm not assuming, i'm actually telling the truth. As far as I'm concern, there's only one truth to believe, and it's contradictory to say that there are different truths existing in one thing at the same time and the same sense(law of non-contradictions). If we have applied proper interpretation of Scripture, it's impossible to come up with a different understanding unless you have a different worldview/presupposition to stand on, especially in interpreting a verse in order to suit your doctrine. "I get that you think we are wrong, but you don't have to assume that people are uneducated just because they come to different conclusions than you." I also get that you think that you are assuming that i'm assuming him as an uneducated person, but guess what, you just did the same thing to me. I didn't utter anything personal against him nor even attack his credibility except his mocking of proper interpretation, but here you are making up things in order to make a person feel bad about telling the truth. I couldn't care less if you perceived my reply as an insult, it's your problem. What my concern here is not to flatter anyone for the sake of making them to feel better about their impetuous opinion, compromising and pretending that it's okay to have a wrong interpretation of Scripture. My friend, what we're talking about here is God's word, not just any political dispositions. And i have no room to such mediocrity. I don't need to know people personally to judge them; as a matter fact, Jesus judged the pharisees based on their wrong view of interpretation, and he need not to 'know' them at all. Word of God is non-negotiable. If you want to downgrade Scripture by just "agree to disagree", then you are free to do so. I'm taught that speaking truth is like a double-edge sword, and you cannot avoid that is truly offensive, but it's neither done to insult and disparage someone. A person need not to have a degree in theology nor to be a Phd to be considered qualified. God does not call the qualified, He qualifies the called. Having a good conscience and objective lense of studying scripture suffices enough to lead a person to a true understanding. I do not boast that I'm qualified enough to handle Scripture with care, but bearing a good conscience and being a witness to God, my heart is solely stood only to the truth.

@growingtruedisciples

2 жыл бұрын

@@jrbuenconsejo5912 when did I assume you were uneducated?

No offense, but I don't think Derek Thomas answered this thoroughly. 1 John 2:2 is difficult because when it is read at first glance without context, it would seem to completely go against limited atonement. Yet the question about 1 John 2:2 that must be asked is what is the definition of the words propitiation and world. That is where you're going to get an answer. The word propitiation means the satisfaction of God's wrath against the penalty of sin (which is eternal punishment). There has to be a someone who satisfies the wrath of God against sinners, and that is Jesus Christ. It isn't a possible satisfaction or atonement, but an actual one. 1 John 2:1 provides the context because this verse begins with "My little children," which John is addressing the believers he is writing this epistle to. In verse 1 it says that these things were written that you sin not. Who shouldn't sin? Those same believers. This goes back to the promise in 1 John 1:9. And then verse 1 says if any man sins, they have an advocate (or Comforter, the same word used for the Spirit in John 14:16) with the Father, that is Jesus Christ the righteous. Notice Jesus Christ is the advocate for the believer if they sin. Jesus Christ is not an advocate for the unbeliever if they sin because they haven't trusted in Christ yet. In verse 2 it begins "And..." showing that it is still addressed to believers and is about Christ. It says, "And he (that pronoun speaks of Christ) is the propitiation for our (that addresses those same believers, as well as all believers): and not for ours (the believers) only, but also for the sins of the whole world." So now the question has to be asked, is Christ the satisfaction of the wrath of God for the whole world if the whole world includes the unsaved that never repents and believes? The answer is no because then either no one would go to hell or Christ satisfied the wrath of God for an unbeliever who would now incur God's absolute wrath shown in Revelation 20:11-15. Either answer would be unbiblical. In addition, verse 2 can't have propitiation mean God's wrath is satisfied for us, but only potentially satisfies the wrath of unbelievers in the world. A word can't have different meanings in a text when it says for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. And the meaning of the word world has to have a different meaning than "Everyone in the whole world who ever existed." Many times in scripture the world can mean different things. In John 15:18-23, it means unbelievers. In John 3:19 and 4:42 it speaks of mankind in general. In John 2:15-16 it speaks of the system of the world. This Greek word for world can have many meanings. And many times it speaks of Gentiles as a contrast with the Jews. You see an example of that in Romans 11:15. And that is the same contrast Jesus speaks of to Nicodemus in John 3:16, Him telling a Jewish leader that God so loves the world (not just Jews, but Gentiles as well as it pertains to humanity as a whole). In 1 John 2:2, I believe the Apostle John is making the same distinction, talking about Gentile believers outside of the Jewish believers he addresses in the epistle. Paul is the apostle to the Gentiles (Romans 11:13) while James, Peter, and John speak more so to Jewish believers. All epistles are applicable to us today, but notice James' epistle is addressed to the twelve tribes spread abroad (James 1:1). The whole epistle of Hebrews is addressed to primarily Jewish believers. Notice 1 Peter is directed to the strangers (sojourners) scattered throughout different regions (1 Peter 1:1) and not to a specific church. There is even a different style and tone between Paul's epistles (directed to the Gentiles primarily) and James, Peter, and John's (which is primarily directed to Jewish believers). Paul goes into more details about our position in Christ (indicatives) before going into our duties (imperatives). Notice James, Peter, and John tend to be more imperative driven (this seems to be the pattern of their epistles as it pertains to addressing the Jews). And in John's use of the word "world," it is used many times to denote unbelievers, Gentiles, or all of humanity. In 1 John 2:2, unless propitiation means everyone's wrath is satisfied, it makes logical and contextual sense that those in the "whole world" means Gentile believers that are out in the world.

@HearGodsWord

2 жыл бұрын

It was part of a lightening round.

@SoopaCoopa

2 жыл бұрын

This was great!

@2timothy23

2 жыл бұрын

@@HearGodsWord I understand that completely, but instead of going on about where he's been in the world, he could've immediately keyed in on the words propitiation and world and their meanings. That propitiation means an atonement that is definite and that world doesn't always mean everyone who ever existed, but others of the elect outside of the "us" in the verse. Though my original comment on 1 John 2:2 was a bit long, it still only takes under a minute to read what I just wrote in this comment. That would still give Derek Thomas at least another minute or so to go into some detail. I'm not trying to attack Mr. Thomas, I just thought he could've answered differently. (Trust me, I've answered Biblical questions in an incomplete or incorrect way many times as a Christian; it's no shameful thing; in fact, it has helped me to form better answers in the future.)

@HearGodsWord

2 жыл бұрын

That's nice for you.

They made a whole denomination based on this?

Excellent!

It's clear that Derek Thomas and Sinclair Ferguson disagree on the meaning of "world", as Sinclair Ferguson made a video recently saying that 'the world' means all of fallen humanity, in his video about Jn.3:16...entitled: In Jn.3:16, does "the world" refer to the elect or fallen humanity? Listen, and learn...

@Bo-gt5do

2 жыл бұрын

I think the context by which the term world is used gives it the meaning intended. Throughout scripture this word “kosmos” is used in many different ways to mean several different things. In Acts 17:24 Paul states, “the God who made the world and all things in it since He is the Lord of heaven and earth does not dwell in temples made with hands” . Here we see that the word world refers to the physical universe that God has created. Another instance of the word world refers to the earth. John 13:1 says “Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that he would depart out of this world to the Father, having loved his own who were in the world, He loved them to the end” . When scripture refers to departing this world it is referring to Jesus death and his leaving this physical earth. The reference to his own who were in the world refers to his followers who would remain on the earth after he departed. A third use of the word world refers to the entirety of humanity. This can be exemplified in Romans 3:19 when Paul states “now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God” . All of mankind without exception is accountable to God. This includes both the elect and the reprobate. A fourth example of the word world is of humanity without believers being included. John 15:18 says “If the world hates you, you know that it has hated me before it hated you” . We know that believers do not hate Christ but rather adore him so this cannot refer to all humanity indiscriminately. It is specific in its scope and nature and is referring to the unbelievers who hate God. Finally, the word world is used to refer to believers only. John 3:16 is the principle example of this use of the word. AW Pink in his famous work The Sovereignty of God says “That ‘the world’ in John 3:16 refers to the world of believers (God’s elect), in contradiction from ‘the world of the ungodly’ (2 Peter 2:5), is established (and) unequivocally established by a comparison of the other passages which speak of God’s love’. In comparison to the verses that speak of God’s love for His elect, the wicked God pities (Matthew 18:33) and He is kind to the ungrateful and evil (Luke 6:35). The Lord endures with longsuffering the vessels prepared for wrath (Romans 9:22) but ‘His own’ God loves! (Romans 5:8, Hebrews 12:6)” . It should also be stated that the word world in 1 John 2:2, while frequently used as a proof text for the unlimited atonement view, goes beyond their stated purpose of salvation being possible for all men to prove universalism if used in the context they mean it. This verse must be kept in the context that it is given and that is referring to gentile believers all over the world in addition to the Jewish believers. John 11:51-52 provides insight into this interpretation when John says “now he did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that he might gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad” . This verse shows that Jesus was going to die not only for the Jewish believers but also the Gentile believers who were scattered abroad. Revelations 5:9 confirms this saying that Jesus purchased for God with his blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.

@michaelstanley4698

2 жыл бұрын

@@Bo-gt5do Calvin taught a general call in the Gospel because Jesus was made a general atonement, received by faith, thus, a particular redemption. As the high priest in Israel made atonement for every one in the nation, including gentiles, which had to be appropriated by faith (Heb.4:2). It is fallen mankind that limits their own mercies (Jonah 2:8). Thus, the word 'world' is the same word in Jn.3:16, 1Jn.2:2, Acts 17:24-31, 1Tim.2:1-6, etc as God bids all men to repent 'and believe the gospel'. Yet the Gospel was designed by God for 'the meek' (Is.61:1, Ps.149:4, KJV).

The reason Pastors can't answer such questions is because they are not willing to appreciate and obey the teachings of Jesus Christ. They also don't teach the teachings of Jesus and His 12 disciples who lived and worked with Him. They only learn and preach the teachings of Paul and Moses in a shallow way. Now, the answer to the great question of 2:2 is simply 2:3. If you have still doubt ask me I shall make it clear.

My experience as a born again wretch for over 43 years is how many people argue for and against this issue, and how little is done to evangelize the WORLD of which the chosen elect will come out of. The Sovereign God of the Universe called, chose, and elected my wife and myself that night we repented and called out to Him to forgive us and come into our lives. We were shared the Gospel message by two people that took the great commission seriously as we do also. Quit arguing and get to work!

I notice a lot of comments scoffing at this answer, and none of them are trying to give a better answer that avoids the obvious heresy. What is the non-calvinist non-universalist heretic understanding of this and similar passages?

John 3:16 KJV 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. "Loved" is also past tense.

@His-Story.ForHisGlory

2 жыл бұрын

@@kevinruggerio1796 "For" is a carry on from the previous verse. Like "because".

@His-Story.ForHisGlory

2 жыл бұрын

@@kevinruggerio1796 Therefore means 'So' or 'for reason of' in conjunction of a previous statement. I think they're similar. I believe 'For' is also a conjunction in John 3:16. Not prepositions.

@angloaust1575

2 жыл бұрын

It was a conversation between Jesus and nicodemus The sermon on the mount was Preached to the masses as were Parables!

"For God so loved the world" does *not* mean "God loved the world so much", it means "This is the way God demonstrated His love to the world". So *how* did God demonstrate His love? By sending His unique Son into it that *whomever keeps believing in Him* will not perish but have life everlasting. Nowhere does that verse promise that all people in the world are saved or even loved, just that God demonstrated His love for us for all to see, the redemption is still through faith as the latter half of the verse says.

@billyr9162

2 жыл бұрын

This is why you can't rely on English to understand The Bible. The Greek word is an infinitive.

@SojournerDidimus

2 жыл бұрын

@@billyr9162 you don't need to learn Greek to understand the Bible, but I do advise to use several translations when diving deep.

@billyr9162

2 жыл бұрын

@@SojournerDidimus You absolutely do have to learn Greek to understand The Bible. The Bible wasn't written in English. You either have to learn it or learn from someone who knows Greek. That's not my opinion. That is the way languages are. You can get some things. You just can't get all of it. Languages are full of idioms and axioms and figures of speech in metaphors. If you don't know what they are you will never understand it. That's not my opinion. That's just a fact of language.

@iamtheteapot7405

2 жыл бұрын

@@billyr9162 Very faithful men of God have taken the time to consider all of those idioms and axioms and translate them as accurately as possible into the english language. Looking at the original greek or hebrew words can often be helpful to deepen your understanding but there is no doctrine that can not be understood from the English translations alone.

@billyr9162

2 жыл бұрын

@I Am The Teapot a translation wont do anything to convey metaphors or figures of speech.

This is actually not a difficult question if you remember the parable of the hidden treasure Jesus taught. The man finds a treasure, buries it in a field, then sells everything he owns to purchase the whole field so that he would have a legal right to the treasure that was buried in the field. Although the price paid covered the whole field, the man was only interested in the treasure buried in the field. The blood of Jesus is valuable enough to pay for the sins of the entire human race, but justification is only legally given to those who are in Christ. God places a "receiver" in those whom He foreknew and when He calls them, though they are dead in trespasses and sins, they are made alive in Christ and through their new position in Christ they receive atonement for their sins through the blood of Jesus. Romans 9 in my opinion is the Check Mate argument regarding limited atonement. The amount of mental gymnastics people have to go through to make the entire Chapter say something other than what it obviously says is interesting to listen to. If God wants to save everyone, why doesn't everyone get a burning bush experience like Moses. Surely my dad who is an unbeliever would turn to Christ if he had the same experience Moses did...What about the nursing infants in Canaan that God told the Israelites to slaughter along with the men and women of those villages? What choice did they have? When people read that they are immediately tempted to accuse God of injustice and Paul, anticipating that argument in Romans 9 reminds them, "Who are you, O man, to reply against God?" Everyone is guilty of sin and to be fair would be to judge everyone. But God has the sovereign right to choose some and pass over others. That's the whole concept of Romans 9 and Paul's answer to why some of Israel was rejecting God if they were supposed to be His chosen people...

And for those who go to this verse: For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, *who desires all men to be saved* and to come to the knowledge of the truth. I Timothy 2:3‭-‬4 NKJV Again, that's not universalism because then we have the same problem: Jesus's blood was inefficient in some cases and His Sacrifice was senseless for some. That's a heresy! Jesus said: As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. John 10:15‭-‬16 NKJV He knows His sheep! But here in Timothy that word "all" means "all kind"! And in the context Paul talks about rulers and kings and that we must pray for them so that we might live in peace because His desire is that "all kind of people" be saved: "kings, rulers, old, young, women, men, foreigners, poor, rich, etc etc" The same word is used later in the 6th chapter: For the love of money is a root of *all kinds of evil,* for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. I Timothy 6:10 NKJV Same word! It's obvious that that's not inclusive: Eva's sin was not because of financial interests, David's sin with Bat-Sheeba, Judah's with Tamar and so forth. So yeah, The Bible must be taken in Its context and interpreted with The Bible!

@huntsman528

2 жыл бұрын

Nice try. All men = All men. The whole world = the whole world. This type of eisegesis is ridiculous. Let's redefine the whole freaking Bible in order to make it say God hates people from birth. If he meant some then he would have wrote some. Timothy isn't saying pray for "some kings" or "some of all kinds of kings", he's saying pray for ALL of your authorities! Just like Jesus died for ALL! Not "some", not "some kinds of people", ALL the freaking people! When you look up "panton", guess what it means? It means ALL!

@marius-9333

2 жыл бұрын

@@huntsman528 so are you trying to say that God is not Sovereign and He wants you to be saved but it's up to you if you do so? That's not sovereignty! That makes YOU the Sovereign one. Are you also trying to imply that God wants every single person to be saved and He waits for each and one of them to choose Him begging them to do so? That makes Him weak and makes man the Master of their own destiny. That's heresy! All men = all men depending on the context! If your teacher asks: "is everybody present?" That doesn't mean "every single person in the whole wide world"! but "all that belong to that class". Twisting the Bible is much more common to people that don't like a God that's Sovereign and want to model Him according to their wants and desires.

@marius-9333

2 жыл бұрын

@@huntsman528 For You are not a God who takes pleasure in wickedness; No evil dwells with You. The boastful shall not stand before Your eyes; *You hate all who do iniquity.* Psalms 5:4‭-‬5 NASB1995 The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked, And *the one who loves violence His soul hates.* Psalms 11:5 NASB1995 “For *God so loved the world* , that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. John 3:16 NASB1995 All this statements are equally true. The problem you have is that you want to explain one and dismiss the other. While the Bible is true in all its content! God hates the sinner and He loves the sinner! He loves the sinner from its conception and He hates the sinner from its conception! Both true! The explanation is very simple though and stunning! God cannot love sin and as a Just Judge He Cannot have complacency in the sinner! He hates sin and hates the sinner while at the same time in His Love calls them to repentance so He can have His Love of Complacency upon them! That's the Grace! That's the love! The problem is that we as men have a distorted view of Love and Hate. God is Holy! Holy Holy Holy! His Love is Holy! His Wrath is Holy! His Hatred is Holy! His Mercy is Holy! We are sinner in the Hands of a Holy and Merciful and Angry and Loving God!

@huntsman528

2 жыл бұрын

@@marius-9333 you're mixing determinism and sovereignty. Sovereignty is simply God authority to rule. It literally means "Lord". The definition can be summed up with "Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases". What you are implying is "determeignty", which is highly unbiblical. If God is sovereign, which He is, then He can do as He pleases. If it pleases Him to create man in His own image as imagers with the capacity to make free will choices to obey Him or not, then He is allowed to do it. If He desires to create non-free will creature's that simply do as He makes them, He is allowed to do it. Since the Bible gives us zero verses that preach determinism and yet it gives us tons of verses that imply we are to obey His commands, we must assume that we are capable of obeying His instructions. Jesus never told us to "wait until you believe", rather He commands us to Believe! It's not complicated. You basically admit that you're rewriting the verses to make them for your man made doctrine. "The Bible can't mean what it says because of my Calvinism!" Yes, God wants all people to be saved. Our failure to obey and believe is not God's failing. Romans literally addresses that question. "God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" and "The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance" and "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life" and "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world". Does God hate when we choose to live in sin? Yeah. He got really angry with the Israelites. I don't see any conflict with God hating sin. Before we were sinners, before we were even created God loved us so much that He planned our salvation by sacrificing Himself. While He may hate us in our sin, His love wants us to repent and to live by faith. Again, I don't think this is complicated.

@huntsman528

2 жыл бұрын

@@marius-9333 There is no verse that says God hates us from conception. With Jesus it was quite the opposite. He wanted infants and children near Him. He loved them. God is love, which is why He desires us to love Him with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind.

He died for all….it is up to the person to accept or reject (that whosoever might believe). Salvation is available to all if they are willing to receive

@Romans8-9

2 жыл бұрын

The word of the cross is folly to the perishing. How can the perishing accept something that is folly to them?

@ar15ona18

2 жыл бұрын

@@Romans8-9 They cannot. John 6:44

@signposts6189

2 жыл бұрын

Really? Where does Jesus ever say specifically that He died also for instance for Judas Iscariot whom He called a devil and the evil and adulterous generation of Jewish leaders whom He called children of the devil who conspired to put Him to death? If you can show that then Jesus dying for as you say "all" without exception will have been proven. After all, Jesus says a lot of things about and to these wicked people.

@jonpool9030

2 жыл бұрын

@@signposts6189 not only that but you would also have to conclude that he died for people who had already gone to a lost eternity

@signposts6189

2 жыл бұрын

@@jonpool9030 Exactly. Whatever purpose Jesus's death serves for the already doomed is only known by the people who advocate this reckless position of His alleged dying for everyone without exception.

You've been all over the world, but you haven't been to the whole world. Your analogy breaks down so quickly.

Related to "the propitiation for sins", I'm developing a position that differs. The sin payment is due to God. Jesus paid that debt. Regardless of person, Jesus stands either as Savior or Ultimate Judge. His blood, being the propitiation for all sin, means He and He alone can be the only one who can fulfill the role of Savior, providing grace and forgiveness of sin to the elect, and Judge of the non-elect who reject Jesus and will be judged accordingly.

@lukejacobson9373

2 жыл бұрын

And that's true that Jesus is the Savior of all men but His atoning work, though sufficient and able to clear the debt of all men, it only works for His sheep alone

Now do "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance,", Peter's reply to the remarks of scoffers. The elect are allegedly guaranteed by decree to repent, so it can't be directed at them.

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the

@alexjoneschannel

2 жыл бұрын

Were the books written so that they decide what we do, or are the books written off what we do? That's the question between the calvinist and molinist

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. I think this vs. settles it once and for all....Are the dead judged for their sins ,,no Why ,because their sins were judged on the cross by Jesus Christ.....The are judged and condemned by there works , all the works they performed to gain the approbation of God. They are therefore condemned by their good works used as a substitute for the works of Christ on the cross. This is the last judgement we are taking about...Why aren't their sin mentioned...This is the final picture....These are unbelievers...judged for rejecting the perfect work of Christ ..using their own good works to try to gain perfect righteousness They can't. The greek word for sin is halmartia...it is not used ...

@iamtheteapot7405

2 жыл бұрын

Yes sir. Amen.

If the "whole world" in 1 John 2:2 means the elect from every nation, what does "ours" mean in the same verse? According to your interpretation, John said "And He Himself is the propitiation for the elect's sins, and not only for the elects but also the elect." That is an irrational way of interpreting the verse. Why not just take what he said? He's clearing separating "ours" and the "whole world". "Ours" is Christians and "the whole world" is sinners.

The short answer is "you can't". It is impossible to believe the Bible, as it stands, and still assert that Christ only died for a select number. 1st John 2 v 2 is crystal clear - to claim otherwise is to refuse to accept the plain meaning of language.

@jonpool9030

2 жыл бұрын

Actually you're wrong on several fronts. First off, to whom was the letter written, was it to Jewish believers? Second was the death of Christ an atonement? The answer to those two questions would help to understand what the statement mean

@bobhutton1409

2 жыл бұрын

@@jonpool9030 If you want understanding of what the verse means just read it! My 10 year old grandson would be able to understand it without the meandering around the plain meaning of the text.

@jonpool9030

2 жыл бұрын

@@bobhutton1409 what? The verse isn't written in a vacuum, it has a context. The scripture wasn't written with verses man, so to say it has a plain reading without understanding it within the context of the surrounding texts is ludicrous and frankly lazy

@bobhutton1409

2 жыл бұрын

@@jonpool9030 No, I am not being "lazy", just reading the Bible as it stands.

@jonpool9030

2 жыл бұрын

@@bobhutton1409 yes you are. Is the Bible written in any context at all. Does context mean anything when trying to understand what's being said?

Many missionary events are from many churches,the Mormons,the Jehovah witnesses,the prosperity gospel,the Pentecostal toungs group,the once saved always saved group,so in conclusion apostle Paul says it all in Galatians chapter 1v8. And jesus same, about the Pharisees they comoass the world to find a proselyte and they end up a two fold child of hell after.

JOHN 3:16 For God so *loved* *the* *world* that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

@alexjoneschannel

2 жыл бұрын

Stop using Catholic verses around here. We want the actual gospel.

““Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭10‬:‭34‬-‭39‬ ‭ESV

I wish he had used Scripture rather than a weak analogy. Read on a few verses to 2:15 where John says „do not love the world“. If „the world“ means all people at all times…is God saying we should not love people? Of course not. The world can mean different things… John himself uses the word world to mean different things depending on context. That must be the first step to the argument. And then of course there are so many verses to back up the idea that Atonement is limited in scope (-> amount of people saved by it) rather than the (also) limited view of Atonement held by Arminians who instead limit it’s effect -> it is incapable of saving in and of itself, because man must add his work (a „decision“) to it. Both Calvinists and Arminians in a sense believe in a limited Atonement. The question lies in the kind of limitation.

When the apostle john says jesus is the propitiation for our sins (. Believers), and not for ours only but for the sins of the whole world, he means that the Lord Jesus in His death died for all sins ever committed from the first sin in the garden of eden to the last sin up to the time of his return on the last day. John knew what the word “world” meant to him and how he was using it. Jesus did away with all sin nailing it to his cross. He removed the barrier that stood in the way between holy God and we sinful men. Having done that God can now forgive those who have faith in Jesus Christ. Whosoever will!!! Jesus’ atonement is only limited by the fact that not everyone will believe, not that He only died for the elects sin, he died for the sins of the entire world!!! You can’t argue with scripture, you might not grasp truth but you can’t make add to it in order to grasp it. You go to hell because you don’t believe in the only begotten son of God, sin has been dealt with and condemned in the fleshly body of christ. It has been removed. You either believe or not believe, and your reaction to the facts of the gospel determine your eternal position! If you are in christ your in the kingdom of God if your in adam your in the kingdom of darkness. In christ is where everyone should want to be. If you have christ your in Gods kingdom. Christ died for the sins of the entire world!! You want to argue about what an apostle said? I wouldn’t!!!

I know that this is not the forum where I should throw out thoughts but I will toss caution to the wind and step past the white lines by which we hold our doctrines. Will everyone stand in the judgement? In at least one place, the bible says no. Psalm 1. Psalm 1:5 -"Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment," and then says this: "nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous;" then; "for the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish." Who perishes and does not stand in the judgement? The wicked. Who is not mentioned in perishing? The righteous and sinners. Who does not stand with the righteous? Sinners. But are they the wicked? Here is the question, and this is of course not of ourselves; this is the judgement seat of our King Jesus; all must come through the Christ. At the Judgement seat of our King, is there grace for sinners? We can go one further and say, are the righteous the elect? This is God's gospel not ours. May God's grace pour out, may He have mercy on us all.

@nykka3

2 жыл бұрын

Could it be that the phrase “stand in judgement “ means the wicked won’t hold up positively to judgement due to their wickedness instead of avoid judgement?

@romans5929

2 жыл бұрын

May be in reference to "every knee shall bow" they will not be standing bug rather. Kneeling or better yet bowing flat in their faces. I couldn't imagine standing before God, He would have to pull me up because I am not worthy to be in His precense, none are but thank the Lord for what He alone has done for us on the cross!

@Qui_Gon_Jinn_76

2 жыл бұрын

Stand in that verse means " be able to stand " meaning they won't be doing anything but laying flat on their faces in absolute shame and fear. Picture someone clinging to a judges feet begging for mercy.

@christiandehlinger3731

2 жыл бұрын

I believe a given understanding of the "not stand" is "on their face" before God. Very possible. I am throwing out there the thought of possible grace from Jesus at His judgement seat; for reasons we do not understand. Verses such as "Lord when did I...?" could spur that thought as well. I am called and I am His servant, Jesus is my LORD. God's gospel must go forward to all.

Am I understanding that he is saying that God doesn’t necessarily love every single person just because the Bible says God so loved the world? I hope not!

@aleczamora6993

2 жыл бұрын

He does just not with the love of complacency. This issue is complicated, God does love everyone universally we see that through common grace, but not with the love of complacency.

@shopson6991

2 жыл бұрын

“As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭9:13‬ ‭ESV‬‬ “For you are not a God who delights in wickedness; evil may not dwell with you. The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers. You destroy those who speak lies; the Lord abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man.” ‭‭Psalm‬ ‭5:4-6‬ ‭ESV‬‬

@HearGodsWord

2 жыл бұрын

The Bible says God so loved the world, not God so loved every single human being.

@Slipy300000

2 жыл бұрын

@@HearGodsWord Then God loved us as a whole creation, and as a person but then we come to know Him intimately as a child. He had to love us to send His Son to us to be saved. I wonder what word was used for the word world. I will try and find it.

@HearGodsWord

2 жыл бұрын

@@Slipy300000 In Greek the word world is κοσμος (or kosmos) and like a lot of words it has multiple meanings, which is where translators can have difficulties at times.

What? He did not answer the question

Sounds like a lot of linguistic gymnastics….

I think if you take 1 John 2:2 to disprove definite/limited atonement, you actually end up with universalism, which obviously isn’t correct. Problem with universalism- how can anyone go to hell if Jesus satisfied God’s justice due to all sinners? How can God find fault in anyone, if they have all been purchased by Christ’s sacrifice? To say it’s because of their disbelief, rejecting the gift of God, well…… disbelief is a sin, therefore surely would be included in what Christ ultimately died for, when he was imputed with the sins of the world. I think people rely too heavily on the use of the word “world” here, as to suggest Jesus died for every single person in the world. As stated earlier, this obviously is incorrect, as many go to hell. John is clear that the world here is really God’s elect that are scattered around the world, in every tribes, people group and so forth. Compare 1 John 2:1-2 to John 11:51-52. John repeats his message almost identically. Instead of saying the whole world, he says exactly what he means- the elect that are scattered across the world.

Hmm So on what you are saying should 1st John 5:19 also read 9 We know that we are of God, and that the Elect in the whole world, lies in the power of the evil one.

So (1John 2:2 ) and (John 3:16 ) is limited only to part of the world and not to the whole world as the scripture says?. That sounds like another man created doctrine to fit a certain theological view that rejects what these passages are actually saying. Shame on these truth deniers"!..

Salvation is given to all races Not just confined to jews All without distinction However limitations still apply Elect from all races

@huntsman528

2 жыл бұрын

@@bosse641 Nice try! "Out of every nation" is in no way equivalent to "the whiole world". This is terrible eisegesis.

@huntsman528

2 жыл бұрын

Says no Bible verse ever. You're literally changing the text in order to fit in a man made doctrine. All means ALL. The whole world means THE WHOLE WORLD! This isn't rocket science.

@angloaust1575

2 жыл бұрын

John17v9 would indicate limited Atonement However great joy in heaven over One sinner who repents So live in hope die in hope of a place In heaven Bring forth fruits meet for repentance!

@huntsman528

2 жыл бұрын

@@angloaust1575 John 17:9 is about the disciples. God didn't draw the world to Jesus before He died. But God revealed to the twelve, the identity of Christ, before the appointed time. Yes, there is great joy when a lost is found, but that is because it is possible for them to stay lost. If the angels believed it was all fixed, there wouldn't be much to rejoice about. Those were saved before they were even born.

@angloaust1575

2 жыл бұрын

John3v21 They who do truth come to the light The goodness of God leads people To repentance!

"Not ours only" ... it's not for us jewish only but also for the non-jews who are in the different places in the world

Why does he not simply ask “well what does John himself mean by the phrase “whole world”? After all the apostle John uses the exact phrase twice in the same letter! Firstly in 1 John 2:2 when he states this: “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” ‭‭1 John‬ ‭2‬:‭2‬ ‭ESV‬‬ Then he uses the exact same phrase “whole world” later in chapter 5:19. Here is is… “We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.” ‭‭1 John‬ ‭5‬:‭19‬ ‭ Just read through the letter and see how John employs the term. It would be the straightforward, logical, proper and biblical thing to do,- in my opinion. Why all the elaborate special pleading illustrations about his travels? This does not explain Johns usage of the phrase “whole world”. What would be better is to see how John employs it elsewhere. “Whole world” obviously means every single individual who is not a believer in chapter 5. So what does it mean in chapter 2?

Even "Calvinists" must admit that the atonement of Jesus Christ is sufficient for all. Leave it at that and rest in sovereign election. The Living God does as He pleases, whenever He pleases, for whomever He pleases. The Living God can save anyone at anytime, whether before time or during time. Is Jesus truly incapable of adding to the number of those His Father gave him before the word go?

@lawrencestanley8989

2 жыл бұрын

You said: *"Is Jesus truly incapable of adding to the number of those His Father gave him before the word go?"* Yes. Because He came to do the will of the Father.

@kalimellington2013

2 жыл бұрын

@@lawrencestanley8989 considering, "The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, NOT WILLING THAT ANY should perish but that ALL should come to repentance." II Peter 3:9 NKJV It seems highly unlikely, if not impossible, for Jesus to be unable to have pity on whomever He wills. The woman in Matthew 15:21-28 was a recipient of freely offered grace, even though Jesus tells her point blank He wasn't there for the likes of her. It's written, "But He answered and said, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Matthew 15:24 NKJV Jesus essentially says to her, 'you are not of the elect.' Yet, He does as she asks. Jesus was sent by God to save WHOEVER would believe in Him, just as He says in John 3:16. Salvation in Christ Jesus is a free gift of grace to ALL who would receive it. Will everybody receive it, no. Can God/Jesus Christ save whoever he wants whenever He wants, yes. He is the Living God, who will have compassion on whoever He will (Exodus 33:19).

@lawrencestanley8989

2 жыл бұрын

@@kalimellington2013 Sir, what you are doing is saying that there is no harmony in the will of the Trinity. How can there be harmony in purpose among the members of the Godhead when the Father sent His Son to die for a definite people, and the Holy Spirit to apply salvation to that same people (cf. John 6:38-39, John 17:2, John 10:29, Hebrews 10:7, 9); yet, Christ, out of His great philanthropy for mankind, purposed in Himself to die for the sins of each and every individual, foreknowing that a multitude would perish because the Holy Spirit, in obedience to the will of the Father, was not going to apply the substitutionary benefits of His atonement to each and every one of them?

@kalimellington2013

2 жыл бұрын

@@lawrencestanley8989 Respectfully, harmony remains my friend. The entire God head works together for the salvation of man. An infinite triune God can do anything, so long as it is not contrary to His nature. We know that God takes no pleasure in the death of men (Ezekiel 18:32). We know that hell was made for Satan and his angels (Matthew 25:41), it is God's justice which will see man rightly punished for sin and sent to hell. Everywhere salvation is offered in the Scriptures it is offered as a contingent proposition, an "if, then" proposition. If you seek me with all your heart, then you'll find me; if a man turns from his iniquity then he'll surely live, and such. To limit God's mercy availed to humanity through the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, is a mistake. Jesus Christ made atonement for the sins of the world on the cross. Sovereign election is the governing principal for the application of His atonement to people. No one, not you, nor I, nor Calvin, et al, are in any sort of position to tell God that He can't save folks whenever He so chooses. Do you really suppose that if Jesus Christ were to ask our Heavenly Father for one more soul He would be denied that soul, post crucifixion?

@Tre492

2 жыл бұрын

@@kalimellington2013 Arminians are so funny…”God is ALL sovereign!!! Except in salvation, we are powerful enough to tell Him no!” 🙄

And 2 Peter 3 vers 9?

@ar15ona18

2 жыл бұрын

Written to believers, about the believers the letter was written to.

@dudenotsoperfect9366

2 жыл бұрын

@@ar15ona18 huh?

@dudenotsoperfect9366

2 жыл бұрын

Its about the Lord who wants everybody saved. Everybody

@dudenotsoperfect9366

2 жыл бұрын

But we just cant and dont understand everything. Lets just leave it at that

@ar15ona18

2 жыл бұрын

@@dudenotsoperfect9366 “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any [of you] should perish, but that all [of you] should reach repentance.” ‭‭2 Peter‬ ‭3:9‬ Inserted “of you” because that’s the context of “all” in 2 Peter 3:9. This letter was written to believers and that is who the “all” is in context of what is being said to them.

Arminians refuse any distinctions of interpretation of Scripture that undermines their demand of retaining merit in the exchange for salvation with the all powerful, holy God of Israel. What the Lamb of God provided on the cross for the redemption and reconciliation of the guilty sinner is not acceptable, nor sufficient to the self reliant, self loving rebel. Name one good thing that the creature does not receive from the gracious and merciful hand of God Almighty?

If John and the Holy Spirit meant something else, they would have written something else. 1 Corinthians 14:33

All will be well: "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive ... God [will] be all in all." (1 Cor. 15:22,28) Also see: John 12:32, 17:2, combination of (John 3:35, 6:37), Rom. 5:18-19, 8:19-21, 11:32,26, 14:11 , 1 Cor. 15:22,28 , Eph. 1:10, Phil. 2:10-11, 3:21, Col. 1:20, 1 Tim. 2:3-6, 4:10, Titus 2:11, 1 Pet. 4:6, 1 John 2:2, 4:14, Rev. 5:13, 15:4, 21:5,24-25, 22:2, combination of (Rev. 22:1,14-15,17a,17c), Psalm 22:27,29, 65:2-3, 145:10a, Isa. 25:6-8, 45:22-25, 57:16, Lam. 3:22,31, Ezek. 16:53,55, Mal. 3:2-3, The Total Victory of Christ videos

How can we reconcile the doctrine of limited atonement with 1 John 2:2? Simple answer: You just can't lol this doctrine is weak

The idea of propitiation is central to the atonement. God is a holy and just God and must punish sin. Bot God also loves His people and desires to be in a relationship with them. In order that both God's love and justice might both be satisfied, the wrath of God against our sin must be placated; this happened in the atonement. On the cross, the sins of God's people were imputed to Jesus and He bore the full wrath of God that is due them. This wrath having been satisfied, God can now be favorable to them. If Christ satisfied the wrath of God for the whole world, is the whole world going to be saved? Many passages in Scripture make it clear this cannot be the case. ( Rev. 21:8) What 1 John 2:2 is telling us is Jesus is the only Savior of the world, that is, He is the only way anyone can be saved no matter who he is. (John 14:6). Jesus died to save people from every nation, and in that way He is the Savior of the whole world. Nevertheless, that does not mean He died for every individual who has ever lived. Jesus' death benefits only those who who trust in Him, for only those who serve Him in faith receive cleansing from Him. ( 1 John : 1:7) This does not make the efficacy of the atonement dependent on us. Jesus does not offer a potential atonement for all that we make effectual by our believing, rather, He offers an effectual atonement for His people, that cleanses them from their unrighteousness. 1 John 2:2 is simply reminding us that Jessi is the only way for anyone to be saved, not that atonement is universal.

@christophersnedeker2065

2 жыл бұрын

How can justice be satisfied by the punishment of the innocent?

@carmensiekierke3579

2 жыл бұрын

@@christophersnedeker2065 2 Corinthians 5: 21 " He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." God is the Just Judge and the Merciful Justifier. It's the doctrine of substitution.

if calvinism is not evil i dont know what is, the word WORLD can mean all image bearers of God or not, however it must be determined by the context of the verse, chapter, book and even the bible as a whole, so for the main fact John made a distinction between "OUR" sins ( those who are saved since he included himself) and the sins of the WHOLE WORLD ( those who are not saved) destroy the false teaching of Limited atonement .

1 JOHN 2:15 Do not *love* *the* *world* or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

We don't at shouldn't as I don't

@jhq9064

Жыл бұрын

At * least*

Calvinist go through all kinds of mental and language gymnastics trying to reconciled what is opposite to each other. Jesus died for humanity not just for some chosen by Him, He cares that no one perish but that everyone come to repentance and thereby, be saved. One point Calvinist don't realize is that Jesus spoke to Jews, not to gentiles, so what He said in the majority of the cases is addressed to the Jewish nation. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. Jesus spoke to those people at that time, not to everyone everywhere and in every century since that time on. Some Jews were not chosen for their lack of listening to the Father, gentiles are blinded the same way when they do not believe. Each one either listens to God and believes or turns a deaf ear to the gospel and Satan keeps them blinded.

@stemofthefly

2 жыл бұрын

How does one who is spiritually dead have the ability to come to faith?

@fcastellanos57

2 жыл бұрын

@@stemofthefly Two things, the gospel is a two edge sword that enters deep inside ourselves and convict us, this is how it does it. I ask you, how did Abraham believed God if Jesus had not died, and there is no mention that Abraham was regenerated? His faith was counted as righteousness.

@Romans8-9

2 жыл бұрын

@@fcastellanos57 Word of the cross is folly to the perishing. How can the perishing believe something folly to them?

@HearGodsWord

2 жыл бұрын

Seems you're the one trying to do gymnastics.

@fcastellanos57

2 жыл бұрын

@@HearGodsWord. Watch videos from Steve Gregg about God's sovereignty and human responsibility. He covers all those questions. No I am not doing gymnastics.

When you are asked this question, and to answer you don't immediately go to the word of God 😂😂😂

@enfire2146

6 ай бұрын

He’s explaining how there are different uses of “world” in John’s writings..?

Here's a hint Calvinism and universalism are both wrong.

Read John Calvin on Acts 17:24-31... 'the world' means 'all mankind dwelling on all the face of the earth', that is, 'every creature', 'every soul'. Christ 'died for the ungodly' even 'while we were yet sinners' (Rom.5:6,7) qualifying every person ever born, even the 'elect' elite like as Jonah was (the first hypercalvinist that I know of). God offers salvation to every one, and yet designed the good news only for 'the meek' (Is.61:1, Ps.149:4, 1Pet.5:5). Calvin taught both a general atonement and a particular redemption.

@billyr9162

2 жыл бұрын

No it doesn't. If that were true the word would not be use to mean cosmetics. The greek word is where we get our word cosmetics. Doesn't anybody study any more?

@michaelstanley4698

2 жыл бұрын

@@billyr9162 Receiving 'the atonement' is what God in Christ requires, because that is 'receiving abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness' in Christ Jesus alone (Rom.,5:11,17, Lu.2:30).

@billyr9162

2 жыл бұрын

@@michaelstanley4698 Requires? Sounds like your saying people have to qualify or something. Maybe submit an application or something. Apply for the job and meet the requirements. Pass the exam. . Then they can receive the permit. Get a license.

@michaelstanley4698

2 жыл бұрын

@@billyr9162 Read what God requires (Micah 6:8) of you, me, and every one, for He is no respecter of persons, and is 'the same' in Christ 'yesterday, and today, and forever' (Heb.13:8). Qualify all you say with Scripture. James 1:21, 4:6-10 says it well... Only Jesus is without sin, and thus every one qualifies in God's eyes, being a sinner and 'ungodly', until they in faith receive Him and 'believe on His name' (Jn.1:12, Acts 13:39).

@billyr9162

2 жыл бұрын

@@michaelstanley4698 That's talking about his children. God teaches his children act right.

" The Lord is not slack concerning His promises as some count slackness but is long-suffering toward us not willing that any should perish but that ALL should come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:9 Interpret the all as a man Leave everything else with God HE says we should" go and make disciples of ALL the nations..." Matthew 28:19 Obey the word of the Almighty and work out our own salvation with fear and trembling Amen

@jessethomas3979

2 жыл бұрын

Doesn't that imply that God will not return till everyone's saved? I'm not trying to trick you... Genuinely asking...

@jessyjonas4988

2 жыл бұрын

@@jessethomas3979 " ..for the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared unto all men' Titus 2:11-14 No sinner is beyond the grace of God. But that grace must be appropriated by the one that will be saved. Jesus says he came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. How we see ourselves in light of the Holiness of God will be the difference. If we believe we are ok and not in need of salvation, then we will continue on in sin with unrepentant hearts. " ,,,for this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our saviour who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" 1 Timothy 2:3-4 " that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself..." 2 Corinthians 5:19-20 " for God so love the world...that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son onto the world to condemn the world but that the world through him might be saved." John3:16-17 What is clear is, what God seeks from men is repentance while His judgment tarries. Is it impossible that all the world be saved No! It is not impossible because the grace of God is able and sufficient. Will it happen that all the world is saved No, why not because the grace of God is not sufficient NO, But because the heart of man is evil and bent on unrighteousness. The point is, the goodness and mercy of God is real. God's ' delay' is to give all men a GENUINE opportunity to repent. The mercy of God is real, the opportunity is real.

@jessyjonas4988

2 жыл бұрын

@@kevinruggerio1796 mankind

@jessyjonas4988

2 жыл бұрын

@@kevinruggerio1796 yes I have heard that The Holy Scriptures have been used to argue opinions and strengthen the evil thoughts and actions of man. This is what I know of our Great God “ I acknowledged my sin unto thee and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord and thou forgives the iniquity of my sin. Psalm 32:5 We serve a God who is ready to pardon and who is long suffering to both those that are saved and those yet to come to the knowledge of Christ. “ they refuse to obey and they were not mindful of your wonders that you did among them. But they hardened their necks and in their rebellion they appointed a leader to return to their bondage, but YOU are God ready to pardon.” Nehemiah 9:17 “ when the good news about the kingdom has been preached all over the world and told to all nations, the end will come…” Matthew 24:14 This is a God who is long suffering to all this is the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ

Acts 17:30 Although God overlooked the ignorance of earlier times, He now commands all people everywhere to repent. Again we need to re-write scripture to fit Calvinism. All people obviously means all the elect. Because God really does not know how to communicate too well so he needs our assistance. People please don’t read The Institute’s of The Calvin Religion and say it’s equal to scripture. It’s not even close. Just read the Bible. It alone is sufficient. Isn’t that what these Reformed preachers say. Sola scriptura.

@iamtheteapot7405

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, the problem with saying the whole world means the elect is that John and the Holy Spirit that guided him, were more than capable of expressing exactly that and yet in 2 seperate books they failed to do so. Which makes me think, that's not what they meant.

@mrnoedahl

2 жыл бұрын

@@iamtheteapot7405 Your statement is clear to me. Exactly what did John mean?

@iamtheteapot7405

2 жыл бұрын

@@mrnoedahl I think he meant exactly what he said. Not ours only but the whole world.

EXCUSE ME, but this man is not convincing at all... It grieves me so much, that there are men on LIGONIER answering questions so inadequatly. The biblical answer is: 1) John was writing to the Jews! 2) the Bible explains itself in John: But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. John 11:49‭-‬52 ESV

@carmensiekierke3579

2 жыл бұрын

Elena, go back and reread 1 John 2:2 several times. There is no reference to the Jews. John is not writing to the Jews.....he is writing to believers. You don't like Ligonier........but you like Paul Washer? Sigh.

@douglasmcnay644

2 жыл бұрын

It has nothing to do with whether a man is convincing in his argument. What matters is whether his argument is true or false. Even if somebody explains their view poorly, their view may still be right.

"Our sins" refers to Jewish Christians, from 1 John 1:1-5, it is clear that John is referring to the Apostolic band, "the whole world" does not mean every single individual but Gentile Christians. Those from every people and tribe, every nation and tongue.

@iamtheteapot7405

2 жыл бұрын

and He Himself is the propitiation for sins of the Jew; and not for the Jew only, but also for the sins of the Gentiles. Is not what the text reads. If that's what John and the Holy Spirit meant, there was nothing stopping them from saying exactly that.

@mattgates1925

Жыл бұрын

Would you apply this same method to the “all have sinned” passages as well?

@thomasnorton2679

Жыл бұрын

@@mattgates1925 No because there is prior context for that passage from Romans 3. Romans 3:10-11 makes it evident that it is taken about everyone individually and universally.

@mattgates1925

Жыл бұрын

@@thomasnorton2679 Would you also apply this same interpretational method to 1 John 5:19?

What is the world from God's perspective? Jesus says in the sermon on the mount that the meek shall inherit the earth. Those who are lost don't inherit the earth. In God's eternal kingdom they are excluded from the world. The elect end up being the world. That's one thought. Another thing is how many will be saved. I will make no speculation on the percentage, but scripture indicates strongly that the redeemed will be so many as to be innumerable. God told Abraham his descendants would be as the stars. Well we know there are billions. John writes in Revelation 7 about a multitude that no one could number. God's kingdom of His redeemed is going to be massive according to scripture. And it's great news that Jesus didn't just die to potentially save them, but actually and definitely secured their salvation on that cross. One more thing. The old testament day of atonement that foreshadowed Christ's work didn't involve the whole world. Only Israel, only God's people were involved on the day of atonement. The surrounding nations were not.

@iamtheteapot7405

2 жыл бұрын

As someone else has said, the issue here is not the meaning of "world" but with the implication of "not ours only"

Let me get my waders on, cause it is getting deep up in here! And I don't mean deep waters. I mean deep 💩.😅

He started out confused, ran into heresy, stumbled over the word.

@alexjoneschannel

2 жыл бұрын

Watch Trent Horn steam role James White in a debate over preservation of the saints. Was a good debate doesn't drag on like many do

Is he saying that just because the Bible says “God so loved The World, that it doesn’t necessarily mean that he loves every single person who ever lived and whoever will live? I hope not! I would not be able to agree with that.

@ter8330

2 жыл бұрын

Correct. God loves His creation (trees, etc) world means cosmos... and does NOT mean every person. The problem people have with Calvinism, because that is what he is talking about is this: Western Theology, the western churches, antinomianism, etc.. have a problem with God only electing whom He wills to elect. The question that should be asked is why does God love anyone? You cannot choose God and I hope you realize that scripture teaches that. Man is DEAD IN HIS TRESPASSES AND SINS he isn't revived for 4 1/2 minutes says, "Oh I think I must he saved.." and then gets saved. God HAS to override man's will, or NO ONE IN THE WORLD WOULD EVER BE SAVED. I put that in caps on purpose. Free moral agency vs Free Will. Hard concepts. God loves some, and not others. He is God,He does what HE wants. He has to ask you? Pietism and pretrib rapture has permeated and nearly killed the church. Your belief about God, salvation and your eschatological views reveal A LOT about people PERSONALLY. There is a saying amongst the pretrib. groups, "Why polish brass on a sinking ship?" I say," What is the ship is sinking BECAUSE we are not polishing the brass?" God chooses man, man responds. BOTH are taught in scripture. BOTH must be true. However, we are never required to reconcile or understand it fully. And we can't. That is an impossibility.

@aleczamora6993

2 жыл бұрын

There are different manifestations of the love of God.

@st.christopher1155

2 жыл бұрын

Don’t let these ivory tower “theologians” confuse you. Jesus tasted death for every man. If you let them, these Calvin loving clowns will have you doubting the love of the Father for yourself, but these pompous jerks do not know the love of the Father. They claim to be one of the “elect” but are void of the Spirit of God, whereby we cry “Abba, Father”. ✝️🙏🏼📖

@Slipy300000

2 жыл бұрын

@@st.christopher1155 Thank you! I meant to comment yesterday when I woke up with a fresh mind in the Spirit and I said “No!” Like Ralphie catching his foot on the slide as he turns around and says “this is what I really want”. But it’s not about what I want but what I have been given through radical Grace of my/our Jesus. I have tasted it and I have heard the truth through listening to Joseph Prince. It got in my head for a moment thinking am I missing something? I was pretty sure this was not right. God IS Love!

This is lazy exegesis. He talked more about where he’d been than about the actual Bible. Consider some things: John wrote that same message with more specificity in his other epistle in the Gospel here.. “Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.” ‭‭John‬ ‭11:51-52‬ ‭ESV‬‬ Here, he’s not contrasting between those who believe and those who do not believe.. he’s contrasting Jewish believers (the nation) from gentile believers (Children of God around the whole world). That’s John’s entire theme throughout his writings, because he’s trying to communicate to Jewish people that Gods plan is no longer restricted to the nation of Israel.. the fact that that is his target audience is proven by Galatians 2:9 (where John in commissioned to preach particularly to Jews) This is evidence that the contrast in 1 John 2 is the same contrast John has been laboring the entire time: Gentiles are now included in God’s plan for the nation of Israel. Let’s let John interpret himself instead of going on and on about all the places we’ve traveled.

What is the difference between one who is saved and one who is not saved? No, it is not atonement according to the scripture! The difference between a saved person and an unsaved person is the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ. Calvinism while building on the doctrine of Total Depravity, do not believe in man’s depravity, otherwise how can they came up with such a doctrine as limited atonement which has no support of the scripture at all! They fall right at their own depravity by believing in their own thoughts process rather than God’s Word!

That was not a very good response to the question. The illustration was not helpful at all. His travels in no way corresponds to Jesus’ sacrifice. No Bible study to help. It would have been better to simply say that is a good question for which I do not have a good answer.

@aleczamora6993

2 жыл бұрын

Please don’t disrespect Dr. Thomas. It’s a lightning round the answer has to be short

@garyjames6267

2 жыл бұрын

At the risk of being disrespectful again (which was not my goal), answering questions in the lightening round fashion you mentioned is a very bad idea. It sounds a bit careless.

@thomasglass9491

2 жыл бұрын

@Gary James Is not that difficult. When John says “And he is the propitiation for our sins“, that means to the already saved. But when John says “and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world“. That means the elect of every tribe and nation who’s not yet saved. That’s what the video implies also. 1 John 2:2 is tied with John 3:16.

I think this is poor exegesis. This is what happens when scripture gets complicated to conform to a Calvinistic point of view. The scriptures are much more straightforward than this shows them to be, and that includes 1 John 2:2.

@HearGodsWord

2 жыл бұрын

Sorry but your comment seems poorer.

@thomasglass9491

2 жыл бұрын

@Eithan Mintmire Is not that difficult. When John says “And he is the propitiation for our sins“, that means to the already saved. But when John says “and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world“. That means the elect of every tribe and nation who’s not yet saved. That’s what the video implies also. 1 John 2:2 is tied with John 3:16, and Calvinism is a biblical doctrine.

@ethanmintmire7289

2 жыл бұрын

@@thomasglass9491 I’ll have to do more study, and I don’t want to claim I know. I’m still learning and i think you raise a good point. I just don’t know how that makes much sense. But I’ll have to look more. I’ll be open minded👍🏻

@thomasglass9491

2 жыл бұрын

@Ethan Mintmire Absolutely! Pray and Study more, that’s how we learn. God bless

@ethanmintmire7289

2 жыл бұрын

@@thomasglass9491 God bless!

NC It obvious to me that you want to know the Truth. Hopefully you have continued to seek out Truth FROM the Bible, taking passages in its Context, rather than listening to obvious Calvinists who study nothing BUT Calvinist Talking Points. Calvinists will consistently quote “my sheep hear my voice and they follow me” while completely ignoring the fact that Jesus came ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL! This writer is the Apostle John in 1 John. It would be prudent to see how JOHN uses the word “world” throughout his writings. John starts off his Gospel with the creation. In the beginning........... I think we are talking about the all things that were made. Just a few verses in John writes John 1:9 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world. Wondering what you think John means by the word “world” here. The next verse John uses the world 3 times which makes 4 times in two verses. John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. Wondering what you think the word “world” means here. Not many verses later John uses the word “world” again ANOTHER FOUR TIMES WITHIN TWO VERSES. John 3: 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. Wondering what you think the word “world” means here! What “world” did God send His Son into? What “world” is being condemned? What “world” needs to be saved? Now I want you to be observant of the replies you will see here. It will be Deny and Deflect. It will be consistent in not answering any of these points FROM THEIR CONTEXT OF THEIR TEXT and will insist on bringing other meanings TO THE TEXT that are just not found in the Text!

Hate to say it, but this is a terrible response to the question.

@HearGodsWord

2 жыл бұрын

So give us a better one then...

@thomasglass9491

2 жыл бұрын

@CroppednDocked Is not that difficult. When John says “And he is the propitiation for our sins“, that means to the already saved. But when John says “and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world“. That means the elect of every tribe and nation who’s not yet saved. That’s what the video implies also. 1 John 2:2 is tied with John 3:16.

Not in anyway trying to be rude, but this Has to be one of the most terrible answers to a verse like this that I have heard in a long time

Calvinism. So sad. Not biblical. Not Christianity. Pharisaism. Pride in doctrine.

Here's another one: "And I [Jesus], when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." (John 12:32) ?

What a weak argument.

Often the Bible uses the words “world” or “all” in a limited sense. They do not automatically mean “every individual in the entire world.” This is evident when just a few verses are considered. In Luke 2:1 it is recorded that a “decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered,” and Luke 2:3 says, “So all went to be registered everyone to his own city.” But, clearly, it is not talking about every individual in the whole world. Caesar’s decree did not apply to the Japanese, Chinese or countless other people throughout the world.

1 JOHN 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

This seems a strange answer, to a serious question. I don't see how, if 'all over the world' doesn't include every country in terms of travel, that this has any bearing on the question.

1 John 2:2 contradicted limited atonement BEFORE his comments and 1 John 2:2 contradicts limited atonement AFTER his comments.

This guy could not be any more wrong. Limited atonement is a grave error. Don’t get suckered into Calvinism

@alihoussney7870

8 ай бұрын

Baloney! Calvinism is the gospel! If Christ died for all, then all would be saved by the very definition of the words "atonement" and "propitiation".

@ROTAX1

8 ай бұрын

@@alihoussney7870 this is too much of a conversation to have in the comment section on KZread, just do your homework you’ll find out Calvinism error. If you’re really interested in knowing the truth, do some homework. Don’t just buy the Calvinist pitch. Go to Soteriology 101. You’ll learn a lot. If you’re not interested in the truth, don’t worry about it and continue in your error.

@edwinrivera5377

8 ай бұрын

If Christ atoned for all, then nobody would go to hell. And Jesus tells us that the tares will be burned up. Matt 13:30 Tares=sons of the evil one (According to Matt 13:38) You can not use Scripture to argue Scripture, you must Harmonize, Or rather interpret the unclear scripture, in the light of the clear one.

@alihoussney7870

8 ай бұрын

@@edwinrivera5377 He died only for the elect just like the New Testament abundantly teaches.

@ROTAX1

8 ай бұрын

You may carry on in your error. That’s fine. But to say that God from the foundation of the world has condemned the multitudes to hell, that is not the God of the Bible. Sorry. Christ made Salvation available for ALL… The gospel is the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes. Romans 1:16. Such a simple concept directly from the scripture. The Calvinist election position makes God into a monster. Not the God of the Bible my friend.

After hearing what passes for christian apologetics by this gentleman my first thought was, "Wow, he sounds very much like the Mormon apologists I've heard in the past." Purposely confusing, illogical and desperate to answer the unanswerable.

@robmarshall956

2 жыл бұрын

You are a goose

A better question would be, “Why don’t we just believe what scripture says in 1 John 2:2 and stop trying to force the word of the Living God to fit into our absurd Calvinist presupposition of limited atonement?

This is such a horribly devilish distortion of the Gospel. God loves everyone. Jesus made propitiation by his blood for every sinner and every sin. The doctrine of limited atonement is unbiblical and robs the sinner of certainty of forgiveness and salvation.

@Qui_Gon_Jinn_76

2 жыл бұрын

Amen!!!!!!!

@billyr9162

2 жыл бұрын

Malachi 1:3 [3]And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. Ooops

@Qui_Gon_Jinn_76

2 жыл бұрын

@@billyr9162 if you knew A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G about scripture you would understand that the word for "hate" used in this verse meant "preferred not". God was stating that His favor was for Jacob, His choice was Jacob, His preference was Jacob not Essau. Just like in Luke 14:26 Jesus didn't literally mean hate, He was saying that the love for your parents should pale in comparison to your love for Him. God used hyperbole often throughout the scriptures.

@billyr9162

2 жыл бұрын

@@Qui_Gon_Jinn_76 If you knew anything about reading a Greek and Hebrew dictionary then you would know the word hate literally means hate. The word is literally all over The Bible meaning literal hate. All you gotta do is read every time the word is used in The Bible and you'll see it. It's not even hard. And maybe try picking up a dictionary once in a while. Duh!

@Qui_Gon_Jinn_76

2 жыл бұрын

@@billyr9162 wrong. Dead wrong. It absolutely does not mean hate.

The twisting of the word world doesn’t work here (as if it did in John 3 lol) because it says he is propitiation for the SINS of the whole world. Since all are sinners, all must be included if he is to propitiate the sins of whole world. If this offends your sense of justice, you’ll have to take it up with God. But He might point you to the parable of the unforgiving servant, who in the beginning has his debt cancelled, but in the end pays it back in prison.

With all due respect... the Responder to this awkward question embarks on an elaborate smokescreen description of his world travels... (no doubt wishing he was in one of those farflung areas rather than the present hotseat) ....and when quoting John 3:16 provides another delay tactic by showing how much he knows or speculates about WHO said the words....using up half his time before addressing the question. By bluster, elaboration, and a multitude of words he hopes to hide the difficult 'stump' in a forest of trees. The host posing the question would likely find it very hard to convey that explanation to a child who might ask: What did he mean?

This is a DISASTROUS answer to that question. For those that are not satisfied, I’ll give you the real answer right here: But first, just for clarity, let me lay out the problem once more very simply: - this verse from 1 John says that Yeshua (Jesus) died for the sins of the whole world BUT - Then why will there be some people who do not end up in heaven? Why is there such a thing as “the elect?” Why does God choose some, and not choose others? Here’s the answer: when that verse says Yeshua died for the sins of the whole world, The Greek word for “world“ is Kosmos. It literally means the ENTIRE UNIVERSE. (It’s where we get our English word Cosmos). With this in mind, that verse is literally saying that Yeshua died for the sins (collectively) of the entire universe. We don’t typically think of the entire universe as “sinful,“ but it most certainly is. The entire universe is cursed and the disease of sin is widespread across the whole of it. Our understanding of sin is often incorrect. Sin is not merely a decision or an action that we commit. It is also a condition of our being. Even a tree or a rock is sinful- not because it made a sinful decision- but because it is part of this cursed universe. Every atom of this universe is corrupted with sin. Revelation 13:8 says that “the Lamb of God was slain before the foundation of the world.” (Again- the Greek word is Kosmos.) God is perfect. He is also omnipotent. He is also omnipresent. When you combine those three qualities, you get a perfection that is everywhere, all-powerful and all-consuming. This means that the very instant the universe became cursed (remember the Garden of Eden episode?), it would have immediately been destroyed by God’s omnipotent perfection... UNLESS 👇🏼👇🏼👇🏼 Before the creation of the universe, the sacrifice of Yeshua (Jesus) was already in place. Why? So that the omnipotent perfection of God could be redirected onto His own Son- effectively, onto Himself- and the universe could continue to exist the way it does. We forget that the spiritual effects from the cross of Calvary where not bound by time or space. So with that understanding, Yeshua most certainly died for the sin of the entire universe. The plural word “sins” there can be confusing- it’s not talking about Yeshua dying for our individual sinful actions (although it includes that) but rather dying to save the universe from complete and instant obliteration! Does this mean the entire universe will end up in heaven? Definitely not. The verse does not say that He died so the whole universe could go to heaven- it just says He died for sins of the whole universe. If you’re still wondering why God chooses some and not others, see my reply below 👇🏼

@fortheking.design

2 жыл бұрын

Divine Sovereignty vs. Free Will God’s perspective (the big picture): “Apart from Me, you can do nothing.” (John 15:5) The human perspective (the little picture): “The earnest, continued prayer of one righteous man accomplishes much.” (James 5:16) I’ve been learning recently that the relation between Divine Sovereignty and Human Free Will is like the Trinity- we will only be able to understand it when we are outside our current space-time dimension. Which is actually fine- because it’s proof that the truth of God transcends this reality since it cannot be comprehended while stuck inside this reality 😱 Here’s an example of the parallel truths again but this time they’re only 1 verse apart: Gods perspective (the big picture): “What sorrow awaits Assyria, the rod of my anger. I use it as a club to express my anger. I am sending Assyria against a godless nation, against a people with whom I am angry. Assyria will plunder them, trampling them like dirt beneath its feet.” (‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭10:5-6) “But the king of Assyria will not understand that he is my tool; his mind does not work that way. His plan is simply to destroy, to cut down nation after nation.” ‭‭(Isaiah‬ ‭10:7‬) The human perspective (the little picture): “After the Lord has used the king of Assyria to accomplish his purposes on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, he will turn against the king of Assyria and punish him-for he is proud and arrogant.” (‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭10:12‬) The “paradox” is this: why would God punish the king of Assyria if the king of Assyria was LITERALLY the axe head in God’s “axe?” This is God’s reply to the king of a Assyria’s boastful rant about what stuff he thought he did to Israel 👇🏼 “But can the axe boast greater power than the person who uses it? Is the saw greater than the person who saws? Can a rod strike unless a hand moves it? Can a wooden cane walk by itself?” (‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭10:15‬) By the way, these little “paradoxes” are literally scattered ALL OVER THE BIBLE. (See also Paul’s discourse about “the clay and the Potter,” and like every other passage in the Bible 😂) I can’t stop finding them. Sometimes they are even in the SAME VERSE. But I don’t like to call them paradoxes, because one day we will understand it all. For my whole life I always thought I ABSOLUTELY HAD to make sense of these parallel truths- essentially I thought I had to “BEND” them and make them “meet.” But if you do that YOU’VE BENT ONE OF THEM AND ITS NO LONGER TRUE 😱😱😱😱😱😱😱 Literally whenever someone pulls out an allegory to try to explain them and make them “fit” together, if you dig around you discover it just changed one of them Another name for them are “divine sovereignty“ and “human responsibility“ Or “divine sovereignty“ and “evangelistic duty“ The reason Christians debate about it so much is because both sides have scripture to support what they are saying, because the scripture itself speaks about each of these truths and never attempts to reconcile them at all, But simply flips back-and-forth between each one. 🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯 The Takeaway: Because of the fact that the “human responsibility“/“human perspective“ is our DEFAULT and literally comes back up with every single decision we make, it benefits us to set our minds on the big picture - “God’s perspective“/“Divine sovereignty“ because THAT is where our comfort comes from and as soon as we start to forget, we let in fear, condemnation, anxiety, etc. because suddenly it all rests on US.

@garyjames6267

2 жыл бұрын

What Greek text are you using? I have the UBS 5 and sins in 1 John 2:2 is plural in it. Thanks.

@fortheking.design

2 жыл бұрын

@@garyjames6267 I was using Thayer's Greek Lexicon but I’m glad you posted that because I went back and checked it, and turns out it is plural! I realized I had been accidentally viewing the root word instead of the inflected one. I went back and fixed it, and honestly it really doesn’t change my main point, which is this: Yeshua did not merely die to keep us out of Hell, but literally to keep every particle of our universe from complete destruction, and THAT is what 1 John 2:2 is talking about. There’s even a verse that hints at this: Hebrews‬ ‭1:3‬ ‭AMP‬‬ | “The Son (Yeshua) is ... upholding and maintaining and propelling all things [the entire physical and spiritual universe] by His powerful word [carrying the universe along to its predetermined goal].”

This response ignores the fact that every one of the other 22 times John uses "the world" in 1 John, he is clearly referring to the whole mass of men alienated from God. This is called cherry-picking the data.

1 John 2:2 means exactly what the same John meant in John 11:51-53 and Revelation 5:9, ALL KINDS OF MEN FROM EVERY NATION, not every individual person without exception who has ever lived or ever will live! John does not contradict himself and if Jesus died for all people then all people would be saved. So many people are ignorant of the definitions of the words "atonement" and "propitiation".

Love it. True exegesis.

What a roundabout way to dodge what the verse says. "Not ours only, but the world also" who is the "ours?" The local apostle and believers directly with him? Or those being addressed in the letter along with the apostle? Sensibly, the latter. So if the believers being adressed here, then the "sins of the world" would mean just that. Not some esoteric rendering because of a poor parallel of "i traveled the world except china so the rendering here must be the same". That is such an equivocation fallacy it's embarrassingly childish and unbecoming of a theologian. I would say no, you haven't traveled the whole world, you have traveled to many parts of the world. All over many regions of the world, but not the whole world. The verse is explicit, not our sins only, but also the whole world. Romans 5:18-19 as well, all were made disobedient so all may have mercy. Who is all? Only some were made disobedient so some may have mercy. What about total depravity then? You must fenagle and gymnastic around the interpretstion to dodge the implications which would destroy the systematic so one use must mean something different than the other usage, but here is the kicker...it is the same tense, same word, same context, same verse, same usage. All means all. All are shut up so all are shown mercy because God desires all to be saved, to import another verse with similar context.

So sad. With all due respect. The whole passage of Scripture is so clear, unless, you explain it away. (At the end of the video he quoted Mark 16:15 but he did not finish the verse. "...to every creature."

Pretty simple: John 1:29, John 3:16-17, I John 2:2, and many other passages clearly show Christ died for all. "World" in all of John's writings either refers to all of mankind, or all of creation (with the possible exception of John 6). Therefore, Calvinists MUST abandon exegesis of these passages to get what they want. They will infer from it ("If it mans all of mankind, then that means all will be saved"). They will "harmonize" the meaning away ("Matthew says Christ came for the lost sheep of Israel"). But they cannot exegete these passages and get it and get "world" to refer to just the elect. Notice this guy did not exegete the I John 2:2 passage? One of the many reasons i am a NO POINT Calvinist. I see NO POINT in being one. 🙂

"whole world" seems all encompassing and it wasn't dealt with at all. I think there can be consistency in the fact that 1) Jesus became sin and died for all people. 2) Because of Christ's atoning work, we can be reconciled to God. 3) The Father has set apart from the beginning of time who would be saved (No one comes to Christ unless the Father draws him). Christ's work on the cross was effective for all, though not all will believe.