Pristine Grace
Page 1 of 9 1 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 165

Thread: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Many Calvinists claim that people who believe in a Jesus that died to pay for the sins all people are indeed saved.
    These same people also believe that the Jesus found in the bible could not do two opposite things at exactly the same time. For example he could not while he was on the Cross have died to pay for the sins of only some people at exactly same time he was also dying to pay for the sins of all people.
    They also believe you must believe in the Jesus found in the bible in order to be saved.
    This creates a large theological problem. Since Jesus didn’t do two opposite things at the exact same time and one must believe in the Jesus found in the bible, and they (Calvinists) believe he only died to pay for the sins of the elect, while others (including Arminians) believe he died to pay for the sins of all people, there must be a Jesus available in the bible to accommodate both positions, if they (many Calvinists) believe people believing in either Jesus are saved.

    Therefore in the system they (many Calvinists) set up, there would have to be four people in the Godhead instead of three (the trinity).
    1 The father
    2 The Holy Spirit
    3 The Jesus that died to pay for the sins of all people
    4 The Jesus that died to pay for the sins of only some people (the elect)

    Do you agree or disagree?


    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    What is interesting about this is that Calvinists that assume people who believe in a Jesus that died to pay for the sins of all people are saved, is that one does not have to have the correct understanding of or believe in the Calvinist limited view of the extent of the atonement in order to be saved. This is because they say it is not an essential doctrine such as the trinity. In other words you need to believe in the trinity to be saved but not in particular redemption (limited atonement) to be saved. They would say many non Calvinists have a misunderstanding of the extent of the atonement. But where does the bible say you can use a misunderstanding of doctrine as an excuse to believe in a Jesus not found in Scripture (the bible)? What would the creation of a fourth person in the God head mean in relation to the salvation of some Calvinists, since it is not the biblical Trinitarian view?
    Any thoughts?
    Thanks
    WDJD
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Where do you get this information?

    Please, post plenty of documentation of your claims. Books, author names, quotes from Calvinists supporting your claims, quotes from Calvin, and other documentation in order for us to have a wholesome discussion.
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Milt,
    Thanks for the reply. What specific claims are you referring to? If you think what I presented is wrong then why do you think I am wrong?
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  5. #5
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Hawaiian Islands
    Posts
    3,672
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    74
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    119
    Thanked in
    65 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    I think Jim is constructing a logical implication of what 'Calvinists' who believe in some form of General Atonement are proposing--not what such 'Calvinists' would claim for themselves. The implication is that a paradoxical Christ who is affirmed to both atone for every soul and also affirmed to atone for the elect only is like inventing and confessing two Christs, not one.
    I got four things to live by: don't say nothin' that will hurt anybody; don't give advice--no one will take it anyway; don't complain; don't explain. Walter Scott

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by WDJD View Post
    Milt,
    Thanks for the reply. What specific claims are you referring to? If you think what I presented is wrong then why do you think I am wrong?
    Thanks. There is no need to post anything.

    Milt
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    WDJD:

    I don't think that your argument logically follows. If a person must believe the Jesus found in the Bible in order to be saved, it does not necessarily follow that a person has to understand all of Jesus intentions in order to be saved. There is a difference between denying who Jesus is--fully God and fully man, and understanding all of Jesus' intentions. I don't completely understand why Jesus started writing in the ground with His finger, I'm not exactly sure what His intentions were. But salvation does not depend upon what Jesus' intentions were but what Jesus did for me. Jesus died on the cross for my sins. Whether I believe that in Jesus death He intended to pay also for the sins of Tom, Dick, and Harry or only Tom does not change the fact that Jesus died for me. My belief that Jesus died for all men obviously means that I believe Jesus died for those who believe in a limited atonement. Neither should the reverse. Jesus, Paul, or whomever does not go on any kind of inquisition arguing that people who believe that Jesus died for all men are damned and believe in a different Jesus and so neither should we unless we think we know better than Jesus. Perhaps those who go on such inquisitions actually believe in a different Jesus since Jesus never went on these limited atonement rants.
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Robert,
    Yes you are correct about my general premise. Many people today do not think through the logical and or practical implications of the theological positions that they adopt and promote. I believe this mainly comes from a low view of God. They come up with something that sounds good to them from their perspective rather than studying scripture to figure out how God might view their theological position from his perspective.
    In relation to what I laid out in my original post:
    First God knows that nowhere in his word does it say that Jesus died to pay for the sins of all people. He knows that in order to be saved you must believe in the Jesus found in Scripture that died to pay for the sins of only some people. He also knows that nowhere in his word does it say that you can believe in any other Jesus and be saved.
    When God hears someone claim that you can believe in a Jesus that died to pay for the sins of all people and be saved, how do these people know that God does not think they are creating another Jesus, one not found in Scripture? Thus creating a false idol for others if not for them to believe in. Is this what the Holy Spirit leads saved people do? Do saved people conduct themselves in this way?
    God may look at things very differently than we do. Is it possible that from God’s perspective he doesn’t think these people believe in the Trinity as laid out in his word?
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Chuck,
    You wrote:
    I don't think that your argument logically follows. If a person must believe the Jesus found in the Bible in order to be saved, it does not necessarily follow that a person has to understand all of Jesus intentions in order to be saved. There is a difference between denying who Jesus is--fully God and fully man, and understanding all of Jesus' intentions. I don't completely understand why Jesus started writing in the ground with His finger, I'm not exactly sure what His intentions were.
    Me
    The question is not do you understand his intentions but do you believe in the Jesus that in history did write with his finger as described in the bible. I never talked about intentions, but about whose sins we actually died for while on the cross.
    You

    But salvation does not depend upon what Jesus' intentions were but what Jesus did for me. Jesus died on the cross for my sins. Whether I believe that in Jesus death He intended to pay also for the sins of Tom, Dick, and Harry or only Tom does not change the fact that Jesus died for me.

    Me
    It is not about intentions but about what Jesus did in history.

    You
    My belief that Jesus died for all men obviously means that I believe Jesus died for those who believe in a limited atonement. Neither should the reverse. Jesus, Paul, or whomever does not go on any kind of inquisition arguing that people who believe that Jesus died for all men are damned and believe in a different Jesus.
    Me
    They didn’t have to because no one in scripture was claiming he died to pay for the sins of all people.
    You
    and so neither should we unless we think we know better than Jesus. Perhaps those who go on such inquisitions actually believe in a different Jesus since Jesus never went on these limited atonement rants.
    Me
    Since no one was claiming he died to pay for the sins of all people, maybe they back then understand the Scripture better than you and others do today.
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  10. #10
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    WDJD, please reduce your font size. Thanks! - Brandan
    This is my signature.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Gill View Post
    WDJD, please reduce your font size. Thanks! - Brandan
    No problem I agree I started setting it too big
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Chuck
    There is no evidence anywhere that anyone believed that Jesus died to pay for the sins of all people during the time the bible was written.
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    WDJD:

    It is not as if Jesus would have had to shed more of His blood or suffer longer in order pay for the sins of more people or would have suffered a shorter time to suffer for fewer people. The Canons of Dordt say that Christ death is of infinite worth and value and able to pay for the sins of the whole world. So the issue is really about what the intention of Jesus was when He died on the cross. There is no statement within Scripture that says Jesus did not die for a particular group of people. There are passages which speak of people for whom Jesus bought falling away from the faith. The doctrine of the limited atonement is based on a series of logical inferences and is not a clear teaching of Scripture. It starts with the assumption that if Jesus died for someone that person would not be damned and that ultimately damnation is a result of Jesus not dying for that person. But Scripture never says this and so even if you believe in the limited atonement, to spend your life focused on the limited atonement, and arguing for the limited atonement does not reflect the emphasis of Scripture.
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Chuck,
    I don’t mean to be rude, but you are taking this thread off topic. You have not really addressed the issues in the ways that I have raised them, but have tried to divert it into a discussion of the different views of the atonement instead of what Jesus actually did on the Cross and how that relates to theological positions believed and promoted by many Calvinists.
    As not to enable such behavior I will not comment on your latest post.
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    321
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar View Post
    WDJD:

    I don't think that your argument logically follows. If a person must believe the Jesus found in the Bible in order to be saved, it does not necessarily follow that a person has to understand all of Jesus intentions in order to be saved. There is a difference between denying who Jesus is--fully God and fully man, and understanding all of Jesus' intentions. I don't completely understand why Jesus started writing in the ground with His finger, I'm not exactly sure what His intentions were. But salvation does not depend upon what Jesus' intentions were but what Jesus did for me. Jesus died on the cross for my sins. Whether I believe that in Jesus death He intended to pay also for the sins of Tom, Dick, and Harry or only Tom does not change the fact that Jesus died for me. My belief that Jesus died for all men obviously means that I believe Jesus died for those who believe in a limited atonement. Neither should the reverse. Jesus, Paul, or whomever does not go on any kind of inquisition arguing that people who believe that Jesus died for all men are damned and believe in a different Jesus and so neither should we unless we think we know better than Jesus. Perhaps those who go on such inquisitions actually believe in a different Jesus since Jesus never went on these limited atonement rants.
    I agree with Wildboar here. How very well put and expressed; his ideas portray my own thoughts on this matter.

    There is ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WORLD between the foundational nature of the doctrine of the Trinity and the 'Open Question' of the extent of the atonement.

    For the record, I believe in an UNLIMITED ATONEMENT but I am neither a Calvinist or an Arminian. I believe there is an 'election of grace' and that salvation is all of God's grace; I also believe that if any person is finally lost it is entirely through their own sin and unbelief. This is the position and emphasis of the scriptures themselves. I dare not attempt to go further than this.

    To attempt to make an 'Open Question' like this an integral, foundational and essential dogma like the Trinity is entirely incorrect, in my opinion.

    An excellent post, Wildboar that has blessed and edified me.

    In Christ, Craig
    I believe I am ETERNALLY SECURE based on the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST! My faith is belief In Christ
    apart from works (Romans 4:5).

    "...for whatever is born of God conquers the world. And this is the victory that conquers the world, our faith. Who is it that conquers the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?"
    (1 John 5:4-5 NRSV)

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    321
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar View Post
    WDJD:

    It is not as if Jesus would have had to shed more of His blood or suffer longer in order pay for the sins of more people or would have suffered a shorter time to suffer for fewer people. The Canons of Dordt say that Christ death is of infinite worth and value and able to pay for the sins of the whole world. So the issue is really about what the intention of Jesus was when He died on the cross. There is no statement within Scripture that says Jesus did not die for a particular group of people. There are passages which speak of people for whom Jesus bought falling away from the faith. The doctrine of the limited atonement is based on a series of logical inferences and is not a clear teaching of Scripture. It starts with the assumption that if Jesus died for someone that person would not be damned and that ultimately damnation is a result of Jesus not dying for that person. But Scripture never says this and so even if you believe in the limited atonement, to spend your life focused on the limited atonement, and arguing for the limited atonement does not reflect the emphasis of Scripture.
    Again, I am in full agreement with Wildboar's post.

    I believe that to make the issue of the 'extent of the atonement' a test of fellowship or a foundational doctrine essential to salvation EQUAL to the monumental importance of the Trinity does not in WB's words "reflect the emphasis of Scripture."

    In a separate thread entitled 'Sorry I was late...' Milt in his usual endearing way made some stirring and insightful points. He pointed out that issues such as the canonicity of James were genuinely 'Open Questions' and NOT TO BE EQUATED with the cruciality and essential nature of the doctrine of the Trinity. I agree!

    It is my opinion, that the issue of the 'extent of the atonement' is a genuinely 'Open Question' and should not be made a test of fellowship. I realise that the official view of Pnet is most probably different from this and I DO respect your right and 'space' to hold to this. If you do not see me as a 'Brother In Christ' that's fine with me; I am not dependent upon your support or agreement in any way. I am ONLY dependent upon God and the truth He reveals to me.

    I DO view you folk as brethren In Christ, because I KNOW through the ministry of the Holy Spirit this is the truth. I also know that Bob holds the Gospel as the standard of true fellowship and that this Gospel is PREDESTINARIAN. I agree that the Gospel is Predestinarian but Luther held this, too, and yet affirmed a UNIVERSAL ATONEMENT. I would agree with Luther, here. Are Luther and myself not Christians? Are we OUTSIDE the bounds of orthodoxy? I think not, however you may see it differently.

    If you do see me as an 'outsider' I will not lose a wink of sleep because I know that God has saved me by His grace and I do not need to defend this before you any further. At any rate, I will still feel free to visit these pages as there are some excellent theological Articles and discussions. I do find, in this context, the site helpful in the overall perspective.

    God bless you, In Christ Craig
    I believe I am ETERNALLY SECURE based on the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST! My faith is belief In Christ
    apart from works (Romans 4:5).

    "...for whatever is born of God conquers the world. And this is the victory that conquers the world, our faith. Who is it that conquers the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?"
    (1 John 5:4-5 NRSV)

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    united states
    Posts
    83
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Craig,
    When you say “open question” do you mean that there is no way of knowing for sure what Jesus did on cross as far as whose sins he died for, therefore it is an open issue.
    Thanks
    WDJD
    For The Truth Shall Set You Free

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    321
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by WDJD View Post
    Craig,
    When you say “open question” do you mean that there is no way of knowing for sure what Jesus did on cross as far as whose sins he died for, therefore it is an open issue.
    Thanks
    WDJD
    Hi Jim,

    Thank you for your honest question and I receive it as a kind invitation to spell out for you what I personally believe on this subject.

    I will write, of course, with the utmost respect for the views of Pnet. Although my views are different from those held on Pnet, I DO see their viewpoint as authentic and worthy of consideration nevertheless.

    When Jesus died on the Cross I believe that He died FOR ALL THE LOST CHILDREN OF ADAM'S SINFUL RACE. This means that He died for all people in a LEGAL SENSE; that is, that every excuse is removed from people for sin and unbelief. The verses that speak of "all people" in regard to the Atonement's PROVISION are too numerous and too clear, in my opinion, to be mistaken on this matter. I am not going to spell out and rehearse what these verses are; they are well known by all people who have an interest in this controversy.

    However, the Bible is also clear that no person can come to the Father unless the Holy Spirit draw him or her; therefore, the Spirit savingly APPLIES the benefits of the Atonement only to the elect. We can say, then, that there is a Universal PROVISION of the Atonement that is FOR ALL PEOPLE; and there is an EFFICACIOUS APPLICATION of the Atonement that is SOVEREIGNLY DESIGNED for the elect alone. I believe, therefore, that it is correct to say that the Atonement is SUFFICIENT FOR ALL, but EFFECTUAL ONLY FOR THE ELECT.

    Now, of course, my viewpoint entails a belief in a "Common Fall" and, of necessity, a certain infralapsarianism to support it. Pnet, on the other hand - and I have studied this position - advocates that the elect were created to be vessels of mercy in the mind of God BEFORE THE FALL (Supralapsarian); that God designed the 'temporary' fall of only the elect and that only they are DESIGNED OBJECTS of God's Love and Grace in any way. The reprobates, on the other hand, were created to be God's DESIGNED OBJECTS OF WRATH by an eternal decree which demonstrates God's eternal disposition of DIVINE HATRED toward them. I believe I have presented the position of Pnet fairly. If the position of Pnet is the correct one (and I am not persuaded that it is) then it is obvious that LIMITED ATONEMENT must be affirmed.

    I can understand the logic and intellectual credibility underlining this position. I cannot say finally and with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY 'you are wrong'. I have never said this and I will never say this. I DO, however, think personally that the preponderance of the scriptural evidence lies with the first option I have presented. That is why I favour this view.

    Now just say - and I have often thought about this long and hard - when I get to Heaven I find out that my statements on this issue are incorrect. Will I be lost? No I do NOT believe so! You see, my salvation is based on nothing less than Jesus' blood and righteousness. I love the good old Christian Hymns because there is so much excellent theology in them. Here are the words from the Trinity Hymnal Number 439 which states my position so eloquently:

    "Jesus, thy blood and righteousness
    My beauty are, my glorious dress;
    'Midst flaming worlds, in these arrayed,
    With joy shall I lift up my head.

    Bold shall I stand in thy great day;
    For who aught to my charge shall lay?
    Fully absolved through these I am
    From sin and fear, from guilt and shame."

    I make a sincere plea. The issue of the 'extent of the Atonement' must NEVER be made a test of fellowship for Christians.

    This is my honest and God-fearing appraisal of the situation. I recognise your right, 'space' and personal individuality to see this matter differently.

    God bless you, In Christ Craig
    I believe I am ETERNALLY SECURE based on the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST! My faith is belief In Christ
    apart from works (Romans 4:5).

    "...for whatever is born of God conquers the world. And this is the victory that conquers the world, our faith. Who is it that conquers the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?"
    (1 John 5:4-5 NRSV)

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    343
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    21
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig kennedy View Post
    Hi Jim,

    Thank you for your honest question and I receive it as a kind invitation to spell out for you what I personally believe on this subject.

    I will write, of course, with the utmost respect for the views of Pnet. Although my views are different from those held on Pnet, I DO see their viewpoint as authentic and worthy of consideration nevertheless.

    When Jesus died on the Cross I believe that He died FOR ALL THE LOST CHILDREN OF ADAM'S SINFUL RACE. This means that He died for all people in a LEGAL SENSE; that is, that every excuse is removed from people for sin and unbelief. The verses that speak of "all people" in regard to the Atonement's PROVISION are too numerous and too clear, in my opinion, to be mistaken on this matter. I am not going to spell out and rehearse what these verses are; they are well known by all people who have an interest in this controversy.

    However, the Bible is also clear that no person can come to the Father unless the Holy Spirit draw him or her; therefore, the Spirit savingly APPLIES the benefits of the Atonement only to the elect. We can say, then, that there is a Universal PROVISION of the Atonement that is FOR ALL PEOPLE; and there is an EFFICACIOUS APPLICATION of the Atonement that is SOVEREIGNLY DESIGNED for the elect alone. I believe, therefore, that it is correct to say that the Atonement is SUFFICIENT FOR ALL, but EFFECTUAL ONLY FOR THE ELECT.

    Now, of course, my viewpoint entails a belief in a "Common Fall" and, of necessity, a certain infralapsarianism to support it. Pnet, on the other hand - and I have studied this position - advocates that the elect were created to be vessels of mercy in the mind of God BEFORE THE FALL (Supralapsarian); that God designed the 'temporary' fall of only the elect and that only they are DESIGNED OBJECTS of God's Love and Grace in any way. The reprobates, on the other hand, were created to be God's DESIGNED OBJECTS OF WRATH by an eternal decree which demonstrates God's eternal disposition of DIVINE HATRED toward them. I believe I have presented the position of Pnet fairly. If the position of Pnet is the correct one (and I am not persuaded that it is) then it is obvious that LIMITED ATONEMENT must be affirmed.

    I can understand the logic and intellectual credibility underlining this position. I cannot say finally and with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY 'you are wrong'. I have never said this and I will never say this. I DO, however, think personally that the preponderance of the scriptural evidence lies with the first option I have presented. That is why I favour this view.

    Now just say - and I have often thought about this long and hard - when I get to Heaven I find out that my statements on this issue are incorrect. Will I be lost? No I do NOT believe so! You see, my salvation is based on nothing less than Jesus' blood and righteousness. I love the good old Christian Hymns because there is so much excellent theology in them. Here are the words from the Trinity Hymnal Number 439 which states my position so eloquently:

    "Jesus, thy blood and righteousness
    My beauty are, my glorious dress;
    'Midst flaming worlds, in these arrayed,
    With joy shall I lift up my head.

    Bold shall I stand in thy great day;
    For who aught to my charge shall lay?
    Fully absolved through these I am
    From sin and fear, from guilt and shame."

    I make a sincere plea. The issue of the 'extent of the Atonement' must NEVER be made a test of fellowship for Christians.

    This is my honest and God-fearing appraisal of the situation. I recognise your right, 'space' and personal individuality to see this matter differently.

    God bless you, In Christ Craig
    I admire the way you disagree agreeably!

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Why Many Calvinists Don't Believe In The Trinity

    Quote Originally Posted by WDJD
    I don’t mean to be rude, but you are taking this thread off topic. You have not really addressed the issues in the ways that I have raised them, but have tried to divert it into a discussion of the different views of the atonement instead of what Jesus actually did on the Cross and how that relates to theological positions believed and promoted by many Calvinists.
    My post was intended to address your assertion that debate over the limited atonement is something other than a debate over what Jesus intended on the cross. Determining a person's intentions is different from determining who a person is. Jesus is fully God and fully man. I am a poor miserable sinner, guilty in thought word and deed for what I have done and what I have left undone and worthy of God's eternal wrath. And because of my miserable state, God died for me because He loves me. I don't know how He could love me but He does.

    If we are going to take "you must believe in the Jesus found in the Bible" statement to an extreme that excludes all from the kingdom of heaven that believe some things different from what the Scriptures actually teach then it seems like there would be several other stops along the way before you get to the limited atonement, if you get there at all. The phrase itself is problematic because it turns the Gospel into law. You are turning "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved" a statement directed to comfort sinners to "you must believe in the Jesus found in the Bible" which may comfort the Pharisees who believe that they have all their theological i's dotted and t's crossed but provides no hope for the real sinners that Jesus came to save who will only be left in despair wondering if they have really mastered everything that Jesus taught. Faith is a gift of God not a work.

    But if we are really going to down this road it really seems that since Jesus didn't talk about the limited atonement we should actually focus on what Jesus taught about. If you read what Jesus taught He kept talking about the kingdom of God/heaven over and over and over again. He kept talking about eschatology. So before we start condemning all who have views of the atonement different from our own it would seem more logical based upon what Jesus said to conclude that anyone who has a view of eschatology different from our own is damned. So either the premill Jesus or the amill Jesus or the postmill Jesus. He could not have died for all of them or you would have three different Jesus' which is even worse than the two Jesus' in your atonement argument.

    We could go down the line with every single doctrine that there is. What would be the logical reason for stopping with the limited atonement and centering all theology around the limited atonement? There is no real evidence of any group of people who really started teaching the doctrine of the limited atonement until around the time of the Synod of Dordt and even they did not center their theology around the limited atonement. Are you really going to tell me that everyone in the Christian church throughout all of history who has believed in the God who justifies the ungodly and recognized their own sinfulness and their utter dependence upon Jesus Christ entirely for their salvation is damned because they believe that Jesus died for a larger group of people than you do? Are you really going to tell me that people didn't really start getting saved until the internet when people stopped reading serious theological writings and started thinking that Calvinism is centered upon the doctrine of the limited atonement?
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

Page 1 of 9 1 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Notitia, Assensus, and Fiducia
    By Bob Higby in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-02-06, 05:30 PM
  2. Veneration of a Statue???
    By ashamoun in forum General Discussion Archive
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-16-05, 12:19 PM
  3. between brothers and sisters...
    By countrymouse in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-30-04, 03:12 PM
  4. Church Membership Courses
    By Alan Stevens in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-05-02, 06:30 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •