Parture
01-14-2010, 08:12 PM
Spurgeon accuses God of dying for the sins of the whole world by saying, "We dare not think that the blood of Christ was shed with the intention of saving those whom God foreknew never could be saved. This is a thousand times more repulsive than particular redemption." He admits the Calvinism particular redemption is evil. Spurgeon's famous double talk! And who says someone couldn't have been saved? That would make the god of Calvinism the author of evil. All of Christ's blood had to be shed and the full penalty of sin paid to save even one sinner.
Calvinists never agree with each other. James White who believes in particular redemption (contradicting himself in believing in a revealed will desiring all to be saved) said without particular redemption, "Christ was dying for many...who will experience God's wrath for eternity." That's right, people go to Hell because they refuse God's love. John Owen admitted that Christ suffered "all the punishment that was due to sin." This contradicts White but disagrees with Spurgeon.
A house divided is a house that falls.
Calvin contradicted "limited atonement" when he wrote: "With his own blood Christ expiated the sins which renders sinners hateful to God.... Thus we perceive Christ representing the character of a sinner and a criminal...bearing by substitution, the curse do to sin." Obviously Calvinists are infighting and can't agree on whether limited atonement is true or universal atonement with a prescriptive and secretive will that contradict each other.
White says for Hebrews 7.25, "Christ intercedes for those whom He dies...[thus] He dies for the elect." On the contrary, the verses says that He saves "them...that come unto God by him." Christ intercedes for all who crucified and mocked Him (Luke 23.34), which "undoubtedly includes people who were not elect" (Norman Geisler). Attempting to refute Geisler by quoting Calvin, White perversely turns Christ's prayer of forgiveness into confidence that the Father will punish His persecutors (White, Potter's Freedom, 263) to circumvent a deflect away from God's grace being merciful.
White argues that those who deny particular atonement limit its "power and efficacy." Not so. The infinite power and efficacy of the Cross is not limited by the biblical truth that Christ died for all mankind and whosoever believes is saved. It is Calvinism that limits the power and efficacy of the Cross to a select group.
Some of the arguments you get from Calvinists are specially dumb. Check this one out. White argues that only the elect for whom Christ actually died can say with Paul, "I'm crucified with Christ" and that the unregenerate man in hell can never say, "I was crucified with Christ" as he tries to argue the point would be the case if Jesus shed His blood for all the sin in the world. But of course, Paul's declaration expresses his faith in Christ. It is not true of those who rejected Christ's sacrifice on their behalf, for they still prefer to remain eternally separated from God. They remain eternally delusional like James White is "condemned already" (John 3.18), for he has made his choice, as though irresistibly selected for Hell.
"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit (Phm. 1.25). "You always resist the Holy Spirit" (Acts 7.51). "[The bread...is] my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world" (John 6.51). "I came...to save the world" (John 12.47). Of the brass serpent lifted up on the pole it was promised, "Everyone that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live" (Num. 21.8). "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3.14-15). He was lifted up for only the elect? Leviticus presents an entire system of offerings and sacrifices for sin, and not one is compatible with the particular redemption of Calvinism. If the Levitical offerings were for all of Israel who would believe and obey God's Word, so the cross of Christ to which the sacrifices pointed must be to all of Israel, and thus to all the world.
All of Christ's blood had to be shed and the full penalty of sin paid to save even one sinner.
Calvinists never agree with each other. James White who believes in particular redemption (contradicting himself in believing in a revealed will desiring all to be saved) said without particular redemption, "Christ was dying for many...who will experience God's wrath for eternity." That's right, people go to Hell because they refuse God's love. John Owen admitted that Christ suffered "all the punishment that was due to sin." This contradicts White but disagrees with Spurgeon.
A house divided is a house that falls.
Calvin contradicted "limited atonement" when he wrote: "With his own blood Christ expiated the sins which renders sinners hateful to God.... Thus we perceive Christ representing the character of a sinner and a criminal...bearing by substitution, the curse do to sin." Obviously Calvinists are infighting and can't agree on whether limited atonement is true or universal atonement with a prescriptive and secretive will that contradict each other.
White says for Hebrews 7.25, "Christ intercedes for those whom He dies...[thus] He dies for the elect." On the contrary, the verses says that He saves "them...that come unto God by him." Christ intercedes for all who crucified and mocked Him (Luke 23.34), which "undoubtedly includes people who were not elect" (Norman Geisler). Attempting to refute Geisler by quoting Calvin, White perversely turns Christ's prayer of forgiveness into confidence that the Father will punish His persecutors (White, Potter's Freedom, 263) to circumvent a deflect away from God's grace being merciful.
White argues that those who deny particular atonement limit its "power and efficacy." Not so. The infinite power and efficacy of the Cross is not limited by the biblical truth that Christ died for all mankind and whosoever believes is saved. It is Calvinism that limits the power and efficacy of the Cross to a select group.
Some of the arguments you get from Calvinists are specially dumb. Check this one out. White argues that only the elect for whom Christ actually died can say with Paul, "I'm crucified with Christ" and that the unregenerate man in hell can never say, "I was crucified with Christ" as he tries to argue the point would be the case if Jesus shed His blood for all the sin in the world. But of course, Paul's declaration expresses his faith in Christ. It is not true of those who rejected Christ's sacrifice on their behalf, for they still prefer to remain eternally separated from God. They remain eternally delusional like James White is "condemned already" (John 3.18), for he has made his choice, as though irresistibly selected for Hell.
"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit (Phm. 1.25). "You always resist the Holy Spirit" (Acts 7.51). "[The bread...is] my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world" (John 6.51). "I came...to save the world" (John 12.47). Of the brass serpent lifted up on the pole it was promised, "Everyone that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live" (Num. 21.8). "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3.14-15). He was lifted up for only the elect? Leviticus presents an entire system of offerings and sacrifices for sin, and not one is compatible with the particular redemption of Calvinism. If the Levitical offerings were for all of Israel who would believe and obey God's Word, so the cross of Christ to which the sacrifices pointed must be to all of Israel, and thus to all the world.
All of Christ's blood had to be shed and the full penalty of sin paid to save even one sinner.