Universal atonement != universal salvation

[jmdrake]

Sola_Fide keeps trying to dishonestly dodge this point. So I will spell it out in the thread title so that he can't this time. The Bible does not teach that just because your sins were paid for that you will necessarily be saved. Jesus shows that to be the case in the parable of the two debtors. One debtor had his debt forgiven by the king. He had accepted grace. But he was not willing to extend forgiveness to his fellow servant who owed him a small amount. When the king found out about that he was furious and he reinstated the debt. Ezekial 18:24 also hammers this point home.

"But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will die.

Who is righteous? Only one who has been forgiven by God and declared righteous. And yet Ezekial teaches that such a person can "turn away" and then be guilty of their sins. Their righteous deeds won't save them. Turning away doesn't mean falling into sin. There are plenty of examples of people who sinned after being declared righteous. (David, Abraham, etc.) All of them had the common trait of repenting when their sins were pointed out to them. The problem isn't the fall. It's staying down when you do.

Proverbs 24:16 Though a righteous man falls seven times, he will get up, but the wicked will stumble into ruin.

[Debbie Downer]

Not surprised Sola_Fide is intellectually dishonest and changed the subject or distorts what others argue against his "biblical" and infallible interpretation of the Bible. He did the same in the thread where the Pope talked about universal atonement without making a single mention of universal salvation (which of course Sola_Fide claimed he did).

There really is no point in having any theological debate with him. His heart is not full of love, he does not understand humility, he does not wish to teach, but rather to boast, insult, and judge.

[Sola_Fide]

Not surprised Sola_Fide is intellectually dishonest and changed the subject or distorts what others argue against his "biblical" and infallible interpretation of the Bible. He did the same in the thread where the Pope talked about universal atonement without making a single mention of universal salvation (which of course Sola_Fide claimed he did).

There really is no point in having any theological debate with him. His heart is not full of love, he does not understand humility, he does not wish to teach, but rather to boast, insult, and judge.

Since there is no such thing as a man whose sins are atoned for who is not saved, I don't see how you think my position was "dishonest".

Maybe you don't understand that simple assertion, or maybe you don't understand what the Bible teaches about atonement...but its not 'dishonest".

[jmdrake]

Since there is no such thing as a man whose sins are atoned for who is not saved, I don't see how you think my position was "dishonest".

Your position is dishonest because you have to ignore the plain teachings of Jesus, Paul and Ezekial to come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a man whose sins are antoned for who is not saved.

[jmdrake]

Not surprised Sola_Fide is intellectually dishonest and changed the subject or distorts what others argue against his "biblical" and infallible interpretation of the Bible. He did the same in the thread where the Pope talked about universal atonement without making a single mention of universal salvation (which of course Sola_Fide claimed he did).

There really is no point in having any theological debate with him. His heart is not full of love, he does not understand humility, he does not wish to teach, but rather to boast, insult, and judge.

Hello Debbie Downer. While we are in agreement on universal atonement, and on SF's abrasiveness, I still take issue with the pope and your defense of his statement. The problem is that the pope's statement was both ambiguous and itself unbiblical. As that is not the topic of this thread, I will split and create a new one.

[Sola_Fide]

Your position is dishonest because you have to ignore the plain teachings of Jesus, Paul and Ezekial to come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a man whose sins are antoned for who is not saved.

If God would still punish a man whose sin was blotted out, then He would not be just. To the contrary, Paul speaks about the blessedness of the man whose sins are forgiven.

Romans 4:8
Blessed is the one whose sin the Lord will NEVER count against them."

This is what you have with demonic religions like Ellen G. White's. You have a God who is unjust, a Jesus that doesn't atone for sin, and an exaltation of man's almighty will. That is the picture of man-made religion.

[jmdrake]

If God would still punish a man whose sin was blotted out, then He would not be just. To the contrary, Paul speaks about the blessedness of the man whose sins are forgiven.

Wow. You are a lying bunch of contradictions are you? In another thread you claimed that anything God did is just by definition. And now you want to put conditions on whether or not he is just?

Do you think the king Jesus mentioned in the parable who put the debtor back in prison after first forgiving his debt was just? Jesus seemed to think so. Maybe you think Jesus didn't understand the gospel?

Romans 4:8
Blessed is the one whose sin the Lord will NEVER count against them."

Right. And that is the person who accepts grace and doesn't turn away from it. Again Ezekial points out in no uncertain terms that a righteous man who turns away will pay for his sins. I guess Ezekial didn't understand the gospel either.

This is what you have with demonic religions like Ellen G. White's. You have a God who is unjust, a Jesus that doesn't atone for sin, and an exaltation of man's almighty will. That is the picture of man-made religion.

Yes. When you can't defend your position biblically, you ignore the Bible and try to make it about Ellen G. White. And like a coward you run and hide when I post the actual Ellen G. White quotes that disprove your statements about you. You are the one following a man made religion. It is one that you make up as you go along. It's one where you say in one thread "Anything God does is just by definition" and in another thread "God isn't just even if He does what Jesus taught was just."

[AFPVet]

We need to remember that things changed when Christ died on the cross and was risen. The things mentioned here were before that. After Christ did what He did, it changed everything. Can you still go to hell? Yes... but it is by declining this gift and turning your back.

[jmdrake]

We need to remember that things changed when Christ died on the cross and was risen. The things mentioned here were before that. After Christ did what He did, it changed everything. Can you still go to hell? Yes... but it is by declining this gift and turning your back.

I agree completely. And you don't have to read Ellen G. White to understand that. Sola_Fide knows this, but he is not willing to have honest debate. And in his mind man having the ability to decline a gift and turn his back on God somehow means God isn't sovereign. He can't accept the idea of a sovereign God having the ability to give His creation free will. Thus he denies the power of God in an effort to assert it.