Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Did Christ die for the world? | 1 John 2:2 | Morant61 | 6540 | ||
Greetings Y'all: There have been several threads deaing with the extent of the atonment. Rather than rehasing all of those discussions, I would like to propose something different. A limited discussion on 1 John 2:2. Personally, I think the best way to debate an issue like this is to deal with a limited number of verses. Since I proposed this, I will start first. Here is my take on 1 John 2:2. The question concerning the extent of the atonement is simply this: Did Christ atone for all or only the elect? Many verses, which seem to indicate that Christ died for all, can be interpreted in such a way as to limit the extent of the word 'all.' However, 1 John 2:2 seems to be perfectly clear. There is a contrast here between believers (our sins) and unbelievers (the whole world). Christ is the propitation for all sin. Now, what does it mean that Christ is the propitation for all sin? The word 'hilasmos' is only used twice in the New Testament (Here and in 1 John 4:10). It signifies a turning a way of God's wrath by an offering. The entire ministry of Christ is signified by this word in 1 John 4:10. The gift of salvation in Romans 3:25 is described using a related word 'hilasterion.' This same word ('hilasterion') is used in Heb. 2:17 to refer to the priestly ministry of Christ. In my opinion, this verse is decisive. Christ died for the sins of everyone. The Cross is the one and only act of atonement for all men and for all sin. I don't see anyway, in light of this verse, that one can argue that Christ only died for the elect. p.s. - A note for all those who respond. Unless one is dealing with heresy, I view debate as an opportunity to sharpen our understanding of Scripture. By interacting with one another, we can see how others view Scripture, consider other points of view, and sharpen our ability to deal with objections to our viewpoints. We may never agree with each other, but I can live with that! God Bless, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | Did Christ die for the world? | 1 John 2:2 | Lionstrong | 7017 | ||
Getting back to your proposal of referencing no other verse but the one under consideration: Why can't the verse be understood this way: since the "our" must refer to John and the recipients of his letter, and since they are not the only believers in the whole world, why can't he be referring to believers in the whole world? ("...not only the sins of us (believers), but (believers) of the whole world.") If one does not bring in other verses, be they of the unlimited or limited atonement interpretation, why can't the verse be understood this way? |
||||||
3 | Did Christ die for the world? | 1 John 2:2 | Morant61 | 7026 | ||
Greetings Lionstrong! My short answer to your question would simply be this: If John wanted to say that, he could have very simply - "Not only did is He the propitiation for our sins, but He is the propitiation for the sins of all believers." He choose not to say that. Further, there is nothing in the context that would allow that interpretation. Furthermore, the word "world" is itself qualified by the word "whole." Is there any place in John's writtings where "world" only refers to believers? Is there any place in all of Scripture, were "world" only refers to believers? In my view, the answer to both of these questions is no. In order to interpret "world", consider how John uses the word "world" in the rest of his writings. a) In John 1:10, John says that the "world" did not recognize Christ. b) In John 1:29, Christ is the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world. c) In John 7:7, the "world" hates Christ. d) In John 8:23, the "world" is contrasted with heaven. e) In John 10:36, Christ is sent into the "world." f) In John 12:25, it is the one who hates his life in this "world" who will inherit eternal life. g) In John 13:1, it is the time for Jesus to leave this "world." h) In John 14:17, the "world" cannot accept the Spirit of Truth. i) In 1 John 2:15-16, we are commanded not to love the world. In fact, the word "world" is used a total of 17 times in 1 John alone. In every other occurance of the word "world" in 1 John, it either refers to the physical world or the opposition of the world to Christ. Therefore, in light of John's usage of the word "world" throughout his writings and in 1 John in particular, to add the word "believers" would be an example of forcing the verse to say what our theology demands it to say, rather than letting the verse inform our theology. I appreciate your response. However, I don't see that the case can be made for limiting the word "world" to only believers when John never ever uses the word in that way in any of his writings. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||