John Owen "trilema" (Limited Atonement)

Post by **_Sean** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 3:52 am

duplicate post removed

Post by **_Derek** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:31 am

So Jesus pays the penalty for the unbeliver and then the unbeliver pays it too!
I'm not sure I understand what you are asking here, can you explain your question/point again?

That Jesus pays the penalty that the unbeliever deserves, and then the unbeliever goes to hell and pays the penalty as well.

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 6:56 am

That Jesus pays the penalty that the unbeliever deserves, and then the unbeliever goes to hell and pays the penalty as well.

Another analogy might be as if Jesus invented a cure for a disease called death and it's in the form of a serum. The serum gets delivered to your house and it's free but you're response is necessary to benefit from it. You need to accept the serum and inject it into you for death to be cured. So Jesus created the serum for everyone but not everyone believes it works or not everyone wants to be cured, some would rather die. In creating this serum Jesus suffered and died to create it , it cost him his life yet if you don't accept his sacrifice (serum) then you must bear your own consequences of death.

Post by **_Sean** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:30 pm

Derek wrote:
So Jesus pays the penalty for the unbeliver and then the unbeliver pays it too!
I'm not sure I understand what you are asking here, can you explain your question/point again?
That Jesus pays the penalty that the unbeliever deserves, and then the unbeliever goes to hell and pays the penalty as well.

Ok, I understand your point now. I also think Steve's point above is valid.

I don't think Jesus paid the penalty for unbelievers though. That's why the Gospel isn't "Rejoice, your sins are all forgiven"! Instead it's "Repent! Jesus is Lord". There is an action required in man, this action is rooted in the response to the Gospel.

One could argue that all sin toward God by all men is paid in full by the atonement. But, if you reject Christ as Lord and do not repent then He will judge you, leaving you in the same situation. Since God handed all judgement to the Son, and Jesus said "If you deny me before men I will deny you before my Father". So you could have a situation were all are in the position of having their sins covered but if you reject the One who covered your sin (Jesus) you will still stand in judgement.

You could point back to your original question of how could all sins be covered if rejection of Christ is not covered? My answer is because that's what Jesus said. Jesus said it's your choice.

Also:

2Pe 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.

Peter says there are people who deny the Lord. Jesus said "If you deny me before men I will deny you before my Father". Yet Peter also says they deny the Lord who bought them. So Jesus did die for the unbelievers, but they are not saved if they deny the Lord.

It may seem like a paradox, but it seems to be taught in scripture.

Post by **_Paidion** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:38 pm

1 John 2:2 and he is the means of mercy for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 Timothy 4:10 For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.

Colossians 1:20 and through [Christ] to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

Yes, we cannot be saved from either sin itself or from Gehenna ("hell", if you will), the place or state of correction, unless we become disciples, submitting ourselves to Jesus as Lord of our lives.
But God's great plan of the ages is to reconcile all people to Himself. The fact that God intends to do this, ensures that it will happen. It won't happen automatically, but every individual must submit to Christ, just as you and I did. There is no other way. There is salvation in no other name under heaven. All will come of their own free will. They can't hold out forever.

Post by **_brody_in_ga** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 11:35 pm

Paidion wrote:1 John 2:2 and he is the means of mercy for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 Timothy 4:10 For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.

Colossians 1:20 and through [Christ] to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

Yes, we cannot be saved from either sin itself or from Gehenna ("hell", if you will), the place or state of correction, unless we become disciples, submitting ourselves to Jesus as Lord of our lives.
But God's great plan of the ages is to reconcile all people to Himself. The fact that God intends to do this, ensures that it will happen. It won't happen automatically, but every individual must submit to Christ, just as you and I did. There is no other way. There is salvation in no other name under heaven. All will come of their own free will. They can't hold out forever.

Not to hijack Brother Derek's thread, but I feel a few things must be addressed. Paidion, you said "Yes, we cannot be saved from either sin itself or from Gehenna ("hell", if you will), the place or state of correction. I may be wrong on this, but the bible doesn't describe Hell as a place where correction takes place. Rather a place of torment and destruction.(Luke 16:28-Rev 14:11-2 Thess 1:9) I realize you are a universalist and a Brother, I just wanted to respond to that particular point.

As to the discussion at hand, Derek knows my position on this, and it pretty much agrees with Sean's. So I will not add anything but this one point: Another one of Calvinism's weak points is it's insistance on theological terms as a nessessity for proper bible study. I have heard Calvinist supporters(Gene Cook-Dustin Seegers)say things to the effect of "That violates the meaning of Sola Gloria"or something to that effect. One need only to check out www.monergism.com for proof. Ofcourse, this critique is not only applied to Calvinism, Many Arminians do the same things.

And one last thing, my argument I just used can easily be turned on my own position and make mince-meat of my argument. So, before any of you clever words-men/women call me on it, just remember one thing: I already submit!!!! Uncle!! Uncle!!!

Post by **_Derek** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:05 am

I don't think Jesus paid the penalty for unbelievers though...

I don't understand this. Everyone is an unbeliever at some point. Jesus had to have died for their sins, or else they can't ever become a Christian.

This is basically like saying He died for everyone but didn't die for everyone is it not? A logical contradiction.

Because you go on to say:

One could argue that all sin toward God by all men is paid in full by the atonement. But, if you reject Christ as Lord and do not repent then He will judge you, leaving you in the same situation. Since God handed all judgement to the Son, and Jesus said "If you deny me before men I will deny you before my Father". So you could have a situation were all are in the position of having their sins covered but if you reject the One who covered your sin (Jesus) you will still stand in judgement.

Either way you wind up with all sins paid for by the atonement and then having to still pay further in hell.

Maybe Jesus, since He is the judge, can choose not to "apply" the atonement to the unbeliver. After all, it is He who died. But why would He do that, (suffer in their place), knowing that they would never believe?

Why take thier punishment knowing it wouldn't even do any good?

Thanks for the responces bro,

Post by **_Derek** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:11 am

Not to hijack Brother Derek's thread,

Stay out of my thread Brody!

Another one of Calvinism's weak points is it's insistance on theological terms as a nessessity for proper bible study.

I don't think the Owen quote puts forth any fancy theology. It presents a problem in pretty simple language.

However, the idea of "Penal Substitutionary Atonement" or whatever is rather "theological" I suppose. I am not sure there is a real neccessity to understand the atonement in a "box" since scripture doesn't seem to.

My brain hurts.

Post by **_Sean** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:06 am

Derek wrote: This is basically like saying He died for everyone but didn't die for everyone is it not? A logical contradiction.

Either way you wind up with all sins paid for by the atonement and then having to still pay further in hell.

Actually that's not what I am saying. I'll try another explanation.

Jesus died for all sins potentially. Your sins are not forgiven unless you repent and follow Jesus as Lord.

So that application of forgiveness only comes to those who believe.

I think your looking at it in an absolute sense such as: Jesus forgave sinners so all sinners are forgiven". However, this is not at all the way the Bible presents the atonement. It always states that condition(s) must be met before the Grace of God touches you. The Bible could not make this claim if all sin debt was removed universally.

I don't think you can squeeze this into a theological box.

The atonement does not apply to you unless you meet the conditions for it. It's not as if Jesus died and ascended only to realize everyone is now automatically forgiven! Whoops!

God has the right to place conditions on salvation.

Matthew 6:14
" For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you."

Could Jesus make this statement if everyone is (or was soon to be) already forgiven?

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 7:42 am

Not to hijack Brother Derek's thread, but I feel a few things must be addressed. Paidion, you said "Yes, we cannot be saved from either sin itself or from Gehenna ("hell", if you will), the place or state of correction. I may be wrong on this, but the bible doesn't describe Hell as a place where correction takes place. Rather a place of torment and destruction.(Luke 16:28-Rev 14:11-2 Thess 1:9) I realize you are a universalist and a Brother, I just wanted to respond to that particular point.

We had a long thread about this Brody, under alternative views of hell and like many hebrew and greek words the word translated into "torment" can be used as "correction" or "pruning" just as the word translated into "eternal" really means "age" or "age abiding." The doctrine of eternal torment first came from the RCC.