Many Calvinists mistakenly believe that for one to believe in the unlimited atonement, that would have to make him believe in universalism. They have built this charge on a faulty theory that the death of Christ secures the salvation of the elect. It is the theory of Calvinism that has made this an issue. It should be noted that universalism teaches all will be saved, not that all could be saved. I cannot speak for all that believe in the unlimited atonement, but this is one preacher that does not believe in universalism. Furthermore, I believe that man still has to accept by faith the free gift of salvation. Or course, the Calvinist believes that God gives man the faith to believe.
As for the double payment theory, there is one sin that Jesus could not die for, the sin of unbelief. Calvinist seem to skim over that particular discussion. Even if God did exact double payment for lost people's sins, who are Calvinist to bemoan how God uses His power? Is He not sovereign? "There is no justice in a God that would do that" would be the rally cry. Yet they themselves are oblivious to the fact they believe God is pleased to damn billions, while offering them salvation they could never accept, according to their theory. Where is the justice in that?
When it is all said and done, it is man's unbelief (John 3:18) that sends him to hell. It is not that he is unable to believe, he is just unwilling.
Finally, where does John Calvin tie in with all of this discussion of universalism? As anyone that has studied his works will tell you, Calvin traced his conversion to when he was baptized as an infant. He also forced people to partake in the Eucharist. He killed those that disagreed with his theory about baptism. Is this not a type of universalism? Baptize all the infants to secure their salvation? Force the Eucharist upon those unwilling? And Calvinists accuse me of teaching universalism, when I say the death of Christ made salvation a possibility? At least I do not believe that baptism and the Eucharist made possible the salvation of those willing and unwilling to partake in. If you are reading this and you believe what the Bible says about baptism, know that hundreds of years ago John Calvin would have attempted to silence you also. Thank God we were not in Geneva during the reign of Calvin.
So who really taught universalism?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
"I believe that man still has to accept by faith the free gift of salvation"
I'm sorry...you said man has to DO something before God will save him? Hmm. Go ahead and credit yourself with your salvation, then....since it took your work as well as God's to save you.
"Or course, the Calvinist believes that God gives man the faith to believe."
What do you have, that you did not receive? (1 Cor. 4:7)
"there is one sin that Jesus could not die for, the sin of unbelief."
1. Where is this in Scripture?
2. You just limited the power of the atonement.
Your attacking of Calvin has no bearing on the Doctrine of Grace as found in Scripture.
That's like attacking the KJV because of Ruckman.
To make a long response short, the Bible speaks of a sin unto death. Romans 6:16, I John 5:16 Much could be said about thoeries that abound. Nevertheless, Jesus could not have died for the sin of unbelief. Hebrews 10:29 This sin is unpardonable in this life and the next. Credit for one's salvation will be mentioned in near future post. As for the famous proof text of I Corinthians 4:7- read what is speaks of in context. If I were to take your logic, then I could say, "Well, I have a desire in my flesh to do wrong.I guess God gave it to me." This logic and humanistic reasoning is exactly why we have this mess of Calvinism today. People will twist Scripture to say what it does not.
Romans 6:16 contrasts two lifestyles- the saved and unsaved. One, the slave to sin. The other, a slave to obedience. There is nothing in here about a specific sin that is unforgivable.
1 John 5:16 is discussing sin within the Church...not a sin that is unforgivable.
Hebrews 10:29 states nowhere anything about a sin that Jesus couldn't pay for. It talks more about verying degrees of punishment for individuals taking that action against Christ.
As to your desire....that was given to you by your sin nature. Regardless the source, what do you have that you did not receive?
You speak of scripture twisting, yet somehow out of Romans, 1 John, and Hebrews you get the idea that Jesus couldn't die for all sins? I reckon that means you think John 1:29 should read "some of the sins of the world"?
I will not waste our time getting you to define your terms. I did not have to get past your first statement to find a troubling concern. A slave to sin- a slave to obediance. I wonder if the slave to obediance has no choice but to obey? That seems to be the Calvinistic idea, that we are all puppets and we have no choice in any matter. Regardless, do not fall prey to what you accuse me of doing- reading on the surface.
Post a Comment