Logical Conclusions

[Saved by Grace_06]

"He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." - 1 John 2:2

Many on RR would claim that the "whole world" in that scripture is dealing with everyone individually. OK. Fine. Let's try to take this thought to its logical end and see what we have.

Main Question:

If Christ is the "atoning sacrifice" for the sins of the whole world, i.e., he justified the whole world through his propitiatory death, why are there some of whom he presumably "justified," in hell?

Thinks to Consider before you answer:

1. Christ' death is efficacious - it did what it was designed to do, namely justify and therefore save people from God's wrath. Christ did not come to "offer" salvation, but to secure it.

2. It Purchased Faith for our unbelief.

3. It propitiated God inasmuch as his wrath is now satisfied because Christ suffered in our stead.

[BlessedinHim]

efficacious--capable of having the desired result or effect; effective as a means, measure, remedy, etc.:

If you gonna use a big word, you should put out the whole definition.

Jesus dying on the cross was in deed the remedy to our debt of sin.

[Saved by Grace_06]

efficacious--capable of having the desired result or effect; effective as a means, measure, remedy, etc.:

If you gonna use a big word, you should put out the whole definition.

Jesus dying on the cross was in deed the remedy to our debt of sin.

So are you going to answer the question?

"If Jesus remedied the situation that existed between sinners and a Holy God by justifying the whole world by his propitiatory death, why are there some of whom he presumably justified, in hell?"

[BlessedinHim]

Some reject the remedy, thereby making it of no effect to them.

[HeIsEnough]

"He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." - 1 John 2:2


I think your problem is you refuse to take the scriptures for what they state.

You are to take what God says and believe it. You have no reason to not believe what is said by the sins of the "complete cosmos"

That you desire to view it differently, is to not believe what He says, and that is a problem of a different sort.

When you come upon a scripture that invalidates a certain belief you have, throw that belief out, add another fold to your theology and see the picture which takes shape.

[Saved by Grace_06]

"He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." - 1 John 2:2


I think your problem is you refuse to take the scriptures for what they state.

You are to take what God says and believe it. You have no reason to not believe what is said by the sins of the "complete cosmos"

That you desire to view it differently, is to not believe what He says, and that is a problem of a different sort.

When you come upon a scripture that invalidates a certain belief you have, throw that belief out, add another fold to your theology and see the picture which takes shape.

That's more than a fair conclusion! However - and please be honest here - do you think that your problem could be that you refuse to acknowledge that there is a huge difference between what the bible says and what it actually means? What I mean is this: Our NT is a translation from another language. Why is it that saints of years past, who by the way understood both languages, believed that verse something altogether different from us today? Today we see "and not just our sins, but the sins of the 'whole world'" and assume whole world is everyone. Well, what if John was talking about a distinction between Jews and Gentiles? The Jews then believed to be God's only people, and only through Christ did they realize that God was in the business of also saving Gentiles - vis-a-vis - the "whole world?" Can I show you that from scripture? Consider John 10:51-52 where the high priest Caiaphas prophesied via the Holy Spirit:

"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."

Now be honest here. Isn't that the same thing that John was reiterating?

[HeIsEnough]

Now be honest here. Isn't that the same thing that John was reiterating? [/FONT][/COLOR]

Honesty?

This concept is affirmed in many places, namely the atonement is general and specific. I see interweaving concepts running through theologies, one being this one and how the concept is treated. The only ones which make sense, are the ones which acknowledge it is efficacious for whosoever. While I understand that does not sit well with your logic, it absolutely is what the scriptures teach. I personally am less impressed or worried over a theology which might perhaps try to resolve all dichotomies, I am absolutely concerned over stating something in direct opposition to what God says. It may not make me 'oh so wise' to this world and to those who look for papers of approvement, but it does give me peace about what God thinks.

[Saved by Grace_06]

HeIsEnough

This concept is affirmed in many places, namely the atonement is general and specific.

OK. Well, prehaps you can list them, exegete them, and show why they differ with Christ who taught a definite atonment for his sheep?

I see interweaving concepts running through theologies, one being this one and how the concept is treated. The only ones which make sense, are the ones which acknowledge it is efficacious for whosoever. While I understand that does not sit well with your logic, it absolutely is what the scriptures teach.

I see no probably with that. In fact, I agree that whosoever wills may come and thus be saved.

I personally am less impressed or worried over a theology which might perhaps try to resolve all dichotomies, I am absolutely concerned over stating something in direct opposition to what God says.

I feel the same way. I find it the height of arrogance that while for so many centuries Christians taught and believed a particular redemption, we today say with ease that they were in error. I find our generation lazy and unwilling to dig deep into holy writ. And this is coming for a lazy young guy - so I know!

It may not make me 'oh so wise' to this world and to those who look for papers of approvement, but it does give me peace about what God thinks.

Ignorance is bliss, they say. But, since God did take the time to write communicate his word to me, and since people died to preserve this word, the very least that I could do is study it and not just read it as it was just another book.

[HeIsEnough]

I feel the same way. I find it the height of arrogance that while for so many centuries Christians taught and believed a particular redemption, we today say with ease that they were in error. I find our generation lazy and unwilling to dig deep into holy writ. And this is coming for a lazy young guy - so I know!

I am neither young nor lazy, but you should study up a bit on the history of various theologies.


Ignorance is bliss, they say. But, since God did take the time to write communicate his word to me, and since people died to preserve this word, the very least that I could do is study it and not just read it as it was just another book.

Very good then, continue to study.

[Big Daddy]

So are you going to answer the question?

"If Jesus remedied the situation that existed between sinners and a Holy God by justifying the whole world by his propitiatory death, why are there some of whom he presumably justified, in hell?"Because they chose to go against God's Will. Just like Lucifer did before the law.
In the end of all this, there are only those that are in perfect alignment with God's Will. The ones that chose His Will. That seems to be what the whole Word of God is about, restore what Lucifer broke, but God doing it without violating His Being.

You know, when Lucifer decided to state his 5 "I wills", he was the first to directly oppose God's Will. Many chose to follow him too. (

I am sure his defense then and all along was, "there was now law against it"
All his followers were there too, saying, "Yeah!! What he said!"

All through the OT, he was there accusing. "See, even when there is a law, not one can keep it"
But he also knew that there was a promise made in Gen 3:15.
Lucifer's whole OT mission seems to be to try and thwart that promise from being fulfilled.
Not just that particular promise, any of God's promises. Refute one, and he shows that he IS did ascend to be God, like he said in his "I will's". (Isa 14:13,14)

God sat back and agreed with Lucifer and seems to say, "I can't restore what you did, and punish you without a law." However, He did seem fit to restore what damage Lucifer did, but WITH a law. (Rom 5:12,13)
The same law He gave Adam and Eve was the same one that when broke, allowed all to see that there is a choice, good or evil. Who do you follow, God's Will, or your own?

God entered His creation, and sacrificed Himself as a perfect atonement for what Lucifer did.
That is the ultimate act of Love. That is the essence of God.

If Lucifer had offered himself, he would have attained what he wanted. Too proud, I guess.

SO when Jesus paid the price and finished His Work on the cross, it was finished.

He set all men free from the bondage of sin. By that it is meant that we are now free to choose if we want to turn to our past will, which was subject to sin, or choose to subject ourselves to God's Will, through the faith of Jesus Christ.

The more I have studied this, the more I have realized that it isn't even my faith, but His Faith that saves. I just believe it.