The Intent of the Atonement

Baptist Renegade

Baptist Renegade

Well-known member
Doctor
Elect
Joined
Dec 5, 2022
Messages
1,764
Reaction score
1,089
Points
113
Location
Sugar Land Texas
Against my better judgment, I allowed myself to get "hornswoggled" into taking an "Assessing Calvinism" class which, truth be known, is an "anti-Calvinism" class!:rolleyes: It is my last official class before graduating this Spring and I thought it would be a breeze but since I am "Pushing Back," I need to do extra work in order to effectively support my position.

The person writing the "limited atonement" chapter did a pretty good job - far better than the "Unconditional Election" chapter that Leighton Flowers wrote.

TBH, I pretty much "pussy-foot" on this point taking more of an Amyraldian view. Yeah, call me a "confused Arminian" now!:ROFLMAO:

My position therefore is that the extent of the Atonement is sufficient for all who turn to Christ in repentance and faith - and yes, I am somewhat "Dodgy" with such a response but that is my position and I am sticking to it!

The Author of the textbook outlines the "Intent, Extent, and Application" of the atonement which I hadn't really been exposed to until now but I like how it breaks everthing out.

With the "Intent" of the atonement one asks - "For what purpose was atonement made?" Valid answers would therefore include:
  1. God intended to save ALL men
  2. God desires to save all men but intends only for the elect to be saved
  3. God desires and intends to save only his elect
  4. God intends and desires to save all who repent and believe the gospel (My "loosey, goosey, dodgey" position).
#4 was my response which I stated in my assignment but then I started really thinking about it and have come to the conclusion that THESE ARE ALL WRONG!!!

Think about it (and thanks in advance for bearing with me here), What is the overall, overreaching reason and purpose for ANYTHING That God does?

That's right! God's ultimate intended purpose for ALL THINGS is for his glory and good pleasure!

The problem with our thinking in matters such as this is it is often Anthrocentric rather than Theocentric!

And when I think of the matter more from a Theocentric standpoint, I see all of the silliness and foolishness in squabbling over such things! It is not about US, it is about HIM!

Therefore, I am revising my answer to the following:
  1. The Intent of the atonement is for God's ultimate glory and good pleasure (and let that land where it may)
  2. The Extent of the atonement is that it is sufficient to save all who believe (and make responsible those who do not)
  3. The Application of the atonement is limited to only those who believe
What think ye? Am I still in the "Calvinist" club or am I herewith kicked out, tarred and feathered, and condemned with Pelagius, Servetus, Alayman, and their ilk?🤪 😁
 
Let me throw a wrench in the works. I think you're dead on. You may begin your revision now. :)
 
Baptist Renegade said:
Against my better judgment, I allowed myself to get "hornswoggled" into taking an "Assessing Calvinism" class which, truth be known, is an "anti-Calvinism" class!:rolleyes: It is my last official class before graduating this Spring and I thought it would be a breeze but since I am "Pushing Back," I need to do extra work in order to effectively support my position.

The person writing the "limited atonement" chapter did a pretty good job - far better than the "Unconditional Election" chapter that Leighton Flowers wrote.

TBH, I pretty much "pussy-foot" on this point taking more of an Amyraldian view. Yeah, call me a "confused Arminian" now!:ROFLMAO:

My position therefore is that the extent of the Atonement is sufficient for all who turn to Christ in repentance and faith - and yes, I am somewhat "Dodgy" with such a response but that is my position and I am sticking to it!

The Author of the textbook outlines the "Intent, Extent, and Application" of the atonement which I hadn't really been exposed to until now but I like how it breaks everthing out.

With the "Intent" of the atonement one asks - "For what purpose was atonement made?" Valid answers would therefore include:
  1. God intended to save ALL men
  2. God desires to save all men but intends only for the elect to be saved
  3. God desires and intends to save only his elect
  4. God intends and desires to save all who repent and believe the gospel (My "loosey, goosey, dodgey" position).
#4 was my response which I stated in my assignment but then I started really thinking about it and have come to the conclusion that THESE ARE ALL WRONG!!!

Think about it (and thanks in advance for bearing with me here), What is the overall, overreaching reason and purpose for ANYTHING That God does?

That's right! God's ultimate intended purpose for ALL THINGS is for his glory and good pleasure!

The problem with our thinking in matters such as this is it is often Anthrocentric rather than Theocentric!

And when I think of the matter more from a Theocentric standpoint, I see all of the silliness and foolishness in squabbling over such things! It is not about US, it is about HIM!

Therefore, I am revising my answer to the following:
  1. The Intent of the atonement is for God's ultimate glory and good pleasure (and let that land where it may)
  2. The Extent of the atonement is that it is sufficient to save all who believe (and make responsible those who do not)
  3. The Application of the atonement is limited to only those who believe
What think ye? Am I still in the "Calvinist" club or am I herewith kicked out, tarred and feathered, and condemned with Pelagius, Servetus, Alayman, and their ilk?🤪 😁
Click to expand...
Does God base Hos election towards the redeemed based upon His will and purpose, or upon seeing/koreknowing that we would turn to Jesus to get saved?
 
JesusFan said:
Does God base Hos election towards the redeemed based upon His will and purpose, or upon seeing/koreknowing that we would turn to Jesus to get saved?
Click to expand...

Christ's death atones for every person ... whom the Father intends to save.
 
Jesus said that he knows who His sheep are. He didn't say that His sheep are yet to be determined until they decide if they want to become one.
 
Creed said:
Jesus said that he knows who His sheep are. He didn't say that His sheep are yet to be determined until they decide if they want to become one.
Click to expand...
Knowing something ahead of time doesn't absolutely necessitate that you bring about the effects of your knowledge.
 
ALAYMAN said:
Knowing something ahead of time doesn't absolutely necessitate that you bring about the effects of your knowledge.
Click to expand...

Well, since the fabric of time is part of creation, it does necessitate it. If God knew what the exact number of saved people was from the beginning, that number is fixed and can't be changed—unless you want to assert that a person can falsify God's perfect knowledge of the future by turning left when they should have turned right.
 
Creed said:
Well, since the fabric of time is part of creation, it does necessitate it. If God knew what the exact number of saved people was from the beginning, that number is fixed and can't be changed—unless you want to assert that a person can falsify God's perfect knowledge of the future by turning left when they should have turned right.
Click to expand...
If you’re an honest Calvinist, you can’t tell every stranger you meet that God loves them. (Emphasis on honest.)
 
DrHuk&Duck said:
If you’re an honest Calvinist, you can’t tell every stranger you meet that God loves them. (Emphasis on honest.)
Click to expand...

I can't read anyone's heart, and, if we're being honest, neither can you. When a person professes faith in Christ, that means that they have received mercy. It's that simple.
 
Last edited:
Creed said:
I can't read anyone's heart, and, if we're being honest, neither can you. When a person professes faith in Christ, that means that they have received mercy. It's that simple.
Click to expand...
What does your answer have to do with the price of tea in China? Let me repeat myself, because I can see you either struggle with reading comprehension or you’re a BS artist:

If you’re an honest Calvinist, you can’t tell every stranger you meet that God loves them. (Emphasis on honest.)
 
DrHuk&Duck said:
What does your answer have to do with the price of tea in China? Let me repeat myself, because I can see you either struggle with reading comprehension or you’re a BS artist:

If you’re an honest Calvinist, you can’t tell every stranger you meet that God loves them. (Emphasis on honest.)
Click to expand...

It’s a stupid assertion to begin with and a false presupposition. I summed up for you how an honest Calvinist would respond. Run along now, little Timmy.
 
Last edited:
Creed said:
It’s a stupid assertion to begin with and a false presupposition. I summed up for you how an honest Calvinist would respond. Run along now, little Timmy.
Click to expand...
Got it, so it is the latter. But anyway, here it is again:

If you’re an honest Calvinist, you can’t tell every stranger you meet that God loves them. (Emphasis on honest.)
 
DrHuk&Duck said:
If you’re an honest Calvinist, you can’t tell every stranger you meet that God loves them. (Emphasis on honest.)
Click to expand...

Thanks for repeating the same line over and over again, but sadly, the answer is still the same.

Perhaps your name should have been DrHuk&Parrot because you definitely picked the wrong bird.
 
DrHuk&Duck said:
Got it, so it is the latter. But anyway, here it is again:

If you’re an honest Calvinist, you can’t tell every stranger you meet that God loves them. (Emphasis on honest.)
Click to expand...
Consider another angle... When you pray for the salvation of others, how would it be different than a Calvinist?
 
Creed said:
Thanks for repeating the same line over and over again, but sadly, the answer is still the same.

Perhaps your name should have been DrHuk&Parrot because you definitely picked the wrong bird.
Click to expand...
You never gave an acknowledgment of my statement. You just kept deflecting and skipping around like a schoolgirl at recess.
 
DrHuk&Duck said:
If you’re an honest Calvinist, you can’t tell every stranger you meet that God loves them. (Emphasis on honest.)
Click to expand...

Jesus loved the rich young ruler (Mark 10:21) and yet his story ends with him walking away, rejecting Jesus's invitation to become his disciple. That's the last we hear of him.

Jesus also loved John (John 13:23), who was one of his closest disciples and wrote 20% of the New Testament.

All love is not the same, and even divine love is not equal for all persons or of the same kind. There is a sense in which God loves the whole world (John 3:16). What a Calvinist won't say is that God's love is always saving.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top