How do Calvinists interpret John 3:16

Here you have a clear statment that there will be no atonement, which proves limited atonement. You counter with an argument that boils down to "atonement is unlimited in its availability, it's just that these particular people didn't deserve it, so God withdrew it".

1. The verse still proves that atonement is limited, because if God withdraws atonement from anyone, it is by definition limited

2. Show me a single person on earth who deserves atonement and I'll take your argument seriously that it matters whether or not someone deserves it

 

You still didn't show where I stated " that God does this in only [special cases]".

Secondly, YOU make the statement of "people didn't deserve it", NOT me.

You are setting up your own house of cards (strawman) by trying to interpret what I said (and did so rather pitifully) and then twisting it to your OWN words to make it so you can knock down your house of cards instead of actually answering my refute.

1. The application of the atonement is limited only to those who will receive it (not deserve it) though it be offered to ALL. Atonement is both Universal AND limited. Universal to all since it is "Offered" to ALL, but limited in "Application" only to those who will receive it.

2. No one deserves atonement, that was your made up idea and not even remotely proportionate to any degree of what I was saying.

 

Allan.

1 Sam 3:14 Therefore, I swore to the house of Eli, `The guilt of Eli's house will never be atoned for by sacrifice or offering.' "

There is no atonement given for the house of Eli to reject is there? Answer this point please. :) Don't confuse shadows for reality. :) When Jesus died on the cross He did not die for Eli's house did He? He said they will never be atoned for. Is that not true?

Why did they not receive an atonement? 1SA 2:25 If a man sins against another man, God may mediate for him; but if a man sins against the LORD, who will intercede for him?" His sons, however, did not listen to their father's rebuke, for it was the LORD's will to put them to death.

Why would the Lord die for those the Lord wants dead?

If one receives it then it's deserving as it was a condition to be met.

deserve verb (deserved, deserving) to have earned, be entitled to... (Chambers.)

Since the only condition is to believe and under free will belief is the work of man then having once believed one deserves salvation, it was earned because the condition was met.

That is classic. :) But it cannot be universal can it as it was given only to Israel, but not all Israel are Israel are they? :) Eli's house wasn't Israel was it? ...Although good will be done to Israel, in your family line there will never be an old man. 1 Sam 2:32.

Eli never rejected God. 1 Sam 3:18 So Samuel told him everything, hiding nothing from him. Then Eli said, "He is the LORD; let him do what is good in his eyes."
His sons, however, did not listen to their father's rebuke, for it was the LORD's will to put them to death.

john.

 

again you fail to realize they WERE atoned for up TILL THAT MOMENT. Go back and read what I wrote TO YOU earlier.

There is no atonement ANYMORE for Eli, but there was.
The answer has been given and your hypothosis proved false :thumbs:
They rejected the atonement offered and was henceforth given over to their ungodliness. Just as have shown you repeatedly but you will not deal that.
Christ is the propitiation not only for us, but for the sins of the whole world. No amount side stepping can get you past it. Eli was not born unable to be atoned for it was ONLY AFTER God made that declartion due to Eli's rejection and exaltation of his son's over God and His Word.

Lets see, you left out the part of Eli being very old and hearing that his sons (also well into their mature years) were doing ungodly things and causing the people to transgress. They had already rejected the Law of God and ways of the Lord for self-indulgence and ludeness. They could not repent NOW because they rejected the truth which they held in unrighteousness that could have saved them, and God gave them over to believe their lie. They could not repent at that point. Nothing in the context now the chapter preceding or suseding the verse you quoted states they were NEVER able to be atoned for. The FACT they were priests necessitated they be atoned for otherwise they were not qualified for service when they BEGAN. You are taking an end result, dismissing the biblical principle that states why they can not come to God to try to maintain a view that contradicts the scripture. You are completely not acknowledging everything that leads UP TO that point.

Ask Him, He wrote or breathed the very words which state that says He did.
Christ died for sinners, for the ungodly, for sins of the whole World. :thumbs:

Wrong. You are making a quantum leap that because one accepts an offer it is because they deserve the offer made. Completely false in precept and logic.
First, you can not earn a gift given freely.
If favor is offered to someone who has no favor with the one offereing, then by the context in which the offering is given necessitates (in this instance as with atonement) the person accepting has nothing of worth or value in which to deserve such an offer.
Therefore the accepting of that favor offered does not make the person who is accepting it, deserving by virture of circumstances (having no favor - sinners of the world from which God brought us from) and the nature of gift offered (in propitiation).

That is your cliche` and unbiblical to. It can only be earned if it is a reward for your work. If it is offered when you have done nothing whereby to have the offer extended to you, then you are by definition undeserving, since you have not proved yourself worthy of the offer in the first place. It is the nature of atonement that refutes you "deserving". It is a gift offered when we were and did nothing to cause or compel God to extend such a priceless prize.

Give it up. You can sqeeze blood out of thin air, and you can't make scripture into your personal play thing. Eli's house was under the atoning sacrifice the vast majority of his life as were his sons. Otherwise they could not ahve been temple priests. They came to a point later on in which God denies them atonement.

The fact he did not deal with his sons as he was supposed to by Law, AND the fact that he "kicked against the sacrifice (atonement) and offerings shows without question his rejection of truth though he still preformed the duties of a priest.

And he stated "let Him do what seems good in His eyes". BECAUSE God had ALREADY declared this was going to happen and Eli already knew the judgment of God, and that they which commit such things are worthy of death but he also took pleasure in them (his sons) that do them.
because niether he nor they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And it was for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.:thumbs:

 

He doesn't want anyone dead, but for everyone to have life, but:

He loves even those that reject Him.


Mark 10
21 Then Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, "One thing you lack: Go your way, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross, and follow Me."
22 But he was sad at this word, and went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.

He commands us to love our enemies.
Matthew 5
44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

Jesus prayed for those who crucified Him.
Luke 23
34 Then Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do."

John 3
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

 

But I thought the point Allen was trying to make was that it was justified to withdraw atonement (redemption) because they rejected Him.

I'd love to see someone try to harmonize all these contradictory assertions from scripture. I think they'd find that some are true, and some are not, and the foundation of their reasoning crumbles.

 

Sorry. I guess I should have just stayed out of the discussion. That question (why would the Lord die for those He wanted dead?) by johnp just jumped out at me and I wanted to respond.
Sorry for the confusion. Carry on. :)

 

Hello AmyG.

1CO 13:4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8 Love never fails...

And Hell but an expression of that love I suppose? Love is patient, love is kind, it is not tormenting people burning in Hell is it, forever? Is that the way you see God's love?

If a man goes to Hell because he did not find forgiveness but the Lord still loves him then why is that man in Hell unless a record of wrongs was kept against him? Love keeps no record of wrongs does it? Could you explain this discrepency in God's love for me please? Why does His love fail to protect?

Did the Lord die for the house of Eli? 1 Sam 3:14 Therefore, I swore to the house of Eli, `The guilt of Eli's house will never be atoned for by sacrifice or offering.' "

God says no. 1 Sam 2:20 ...His sons, however, did not listen to their father's rebuke, for it was the LORD's will to put them to death.

Did the Lord say it was His will that they be put to death with no atonement? Did the Lord die for persons He said He wanted dead?

john.

 

Romans 5
8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were STILL sinners, Christ died for us.

He loved us even when we were His enemies.

"Love your enemies and pray for those that persecute you."

Matthew 18
11 For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.(that would be the lost sinners, separated from God)

Matthew 9
12 When Jesus heard that, He said to them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. 13 But go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy and not sacrifice.' For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance."

God loves sinners.

The house of Eli has already been dealt with. I won't go through that again with you. You are misinterpreting that passage.

 

Us Amy.G not the world. If He loved everybody then His love failed. I see you ignore the point.

John 17:9 I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours.
Us Amy.G not the world. I see you studiously applying yourself to ignoring Hell as well. And Hell but an expression of that love I suppose? Love is patient, love is kind, it is not tormenting people burning in Hell is it, forever? Is that the way you see God's love? Yes or no? Does He love those He burns and torments or when did He start hating them please?

The lost sheep are the ones He came to find not reprobates like Eli's house. The Good Shepherd has other failures as well I see, He couldn't find the lost? What sort of God have you been taught about?

Why would the Lord die for those the Lord wants dead?

They are simple points.

Some you mean don't you? If you mean all how do you resolve the little conflict between love and Hell? Please answer this point.

john.

 

Well, at least you include me in the saved elect!:laugh:
God's love never fails. The failure is on the part of those who reject His love.
"If you do not believe, you are condemned already".

People condemn themselves to hell because they reject the Savior and have no advocate when they stand before God in judgement.
You are saying they go to hell because God hates them?

Why would the Lord die for those the Lord wants dead?
God does not want anyone to die. That's why He came to save us. The ones who are not His sheep are the one that WILL NOT listen and follow.

Yes they are. Why are you so stubborn?

It's called free will, John. Yes, you have free will too. If not, why do you sin? Does God make you sin? Why do some come to the Lord on their deathbed? If they were the elect, why would God allow them to spend their entire lives in sin and rebellion before He "regenerates" them?

 

Hello Any.G.

1. That's what you say but I do not see free will anywhere. If it's a question of man's free will why then does God cut that short, if indeed it is true? A man has free will to express his free will, why does God cut men short before they die, is there no more room for forgiveness?
2. Because I was created a sinner by my Creator.
3. Yes. PR 16:9 In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps.
4. Some come to the Lord on their deathbed because that is when their hearts have been opened by the Lord just like He did with Lydia. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message. Acts 16:14. The question is, why don't more do so?
5. What's that to do with you? Rom 9:20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, `Why did you make me like this?' " 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

That's an example of answering questions Amy.G. :)

And why are we condemned? I'll answer it for you, RO 5:18 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men...
God's love never fails. Yes I know I said that to you. Would you please apply yourself to the point. Does God love those He burns in Hell and continues to torment forever continuing to love them as He does so?

People do not condemn themselves as the scripture I just gave tells you, believe it or not. They are not condemned because they have no advocate they are condemned in Adam and have no sacrifice of atonement.

Yes, at least that could be viewed as something not tainted but what about sending them to Hell in love? You mock the word. Free will has no conception of love. It cannot understand or comprehend it because if it did it would have to give the madness up. Does God send them to Hell in love and how can He do that in love? Love protects, it is kind and it does not keep a record of wrongs. You destroy the definition of love for the sake of what? This is the point.

john.

 

I'm speechless.

Best to just disagree. :)

 

Are you implying that our free will enables us NOT to sin, then, and we only sin by choice? That's called pelagianism.

Why not? Do you know enough to counsel God on why He shouldn't do that?

 

I love it when John post Proverbs 16:9

Proverbs 16:9 A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps.

It proves freewill (as I understand it).
It proves the sovereignty of God.

Ta-dah!!! Both are true.

 

Hello Blammo.

PR 16:1 The preparations of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue, is from the LORD. :)

john.

 

Are you saying you sin because you have no choice? If so, why doesn't God stop you from sinning, since you can't help yourself?

I have no idea what pelagianism is.

I don't counsel God on anything. What kind of question is that? I believe people accept God on their deathbed because they spent their life trying to avoid God. Once they realize this is it, they make the decision to accept Christ. But, sadly, some never do.

 

Proverbs 16:5 Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD: though hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished.

 

PR 16:5 The LORD detests all the proud of heart. Be sure of this: They will not go unpunished.

Look, the Lord hates somebody! :) If Blammo is right then God actually hates me. :) Cool. If that is the case then Jesus paid the penalty for it.

You noticed it did you? Well no one is perfect and He humbles me on occasion. I'll pass your concerns onto Him and let Him know you think He cannot control His children properly. :)

john.

 

You could put it that way. You could also say that we're inclined to sin, and we do it by choice. Even from birth, we are NEVER inclined to do good (good as defined by God), therefore we never do good by choice. Some people equate that to having no choice. I have no problem with that interpretation.

Because sin is part of God's plan. No sin, no demonstration of mercy, and the objects of His mercy (the elect) would have no idea that God is merciful. No sin, no consequences or punishment, and the objects of His mercy (the elect) would have no idea that God has righteous indignation and we would not understand that His wrath is part of His glory. Put simply, take away sin, and we wouldn't really know what God is like.

This is not just my idea or interpretation. Romans 9 says it plainly:

Pelagius believed that we are born with the capability to do good and please God. It's all a matter of free will and choice. Pelagianism was condemned as heresy by the early church, and I believe it is still considered heresy today by most half-witted-or-better-thinking denominations.