Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Romans 5:6 ¶ For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Romans 5:6 ¶ While we were still helpless [powerless to provide for our salvation], at the right time Christ died [as a substitute] for the ungodly. |
Subject: Holy Spirit's power of Conviction |
Bible Note: I was not personally offended by your comments. If I got offended every time someone with a theologically different viewpoint questioned my motives, I would be curled up in a fetal position, crying in the corner. Forgiveness is no problem. I do, however, have a knee-jerk reaction to those who claim that those who hold to limited atonement having a dishonest heart. Jonathan Edwards the Great Awakener didn't have an honest heart? Francis Schaeffer didn't have an honest heart? R.C. Sproul does not have an honest heart? John Calvin the Reformer did not have an honest heart? See? Once you start lining up those who held/hold to limited atonement (and this is just the very tip of the iceberg), it becomes clear that either God used in tremendous, powerful ways those with "dishonest hearts" when it came to who Christ died for; or that just maybe their hearts were not dishonest after all. For the record, I did not directly call you a blasphemer. What I did intend to say is that if limited atonement is indeed Biblical, dismissing it as a "doctrinal slant" is treading dangerous water. For example, put the word "Trinity" in the place of "limited atonement." You and I both are Trinitarians, and if a Oneness Pentecostal came along and called the Trinity a doctrinal slant deriving from a dishonest heart, we should think that God would be extremely displeased at such an accusation. While I do not hold limited atonement to be a salvific issue, if there exists even a possibility that limited atonement is what is revealed in Scripture, we should not be so quick to brush it off. Sorry if that did not come out the way it was intended! In any case, I do not see how one can logically hold to unconditional election and unlimited atonement unless Christ didn't actually pay the full penalty for humanity's individual sins on the cross. If Christ actually died for the sins of all human beings (i.e. paid the full penalty), whose sins are those in Hell paying for? |