Sandi wrote:
I had an abortion when I was young. I would have been a lousy mom, then. I will never get over it. If u all want to make changes then preach to the youth and sexually promiscuous about abstaining till marriage, and let God judge those who have abortions, not people who will not be around when the baby needs food, clothes, and child care, which most people cannot afford in today's world. Judge not lest they be judged!

And you can breast-feed, which is the right thing to do anyway. Welfare is there to pay for everything to single mothers, if they want to get on the gravy train.

This rationale makes no sense. Most abortions are done because people don't want to take responsibility for a baby they don't want, to lose their figure, to face the shame and embarassment, just all of it. It's understandable, but the answer is not abortion, and you must repent, not defend what you did.

SC wrote:
Hey John
There are 2 issues here which are distinct and separate, albeit related:
1. The nature of Christ's suffering for those whom the Father has given to him, and
2. Whether if God had elected the entire human population to salvation, Christ would have had to suffer or do any more than he did.
As I said the atonement was not like a financial transaction, where Christ received as many stripes as my sins. The atonement was the shedding of blood, the laying down his life for his sheep etc. The purpose of the atonement was very specific, very particular.
The question of sufficiency (which does not seek to deny particularity) is different in that it asks whether more would have been required of Christ had God chosen to save the entire human population? Would he have been required to shed more blood, die more times? etc.
So the answer to your question, "Does the doctrine of penal substitution demand a limited atonement by logical inference? " is YES. Though logic should not be the determining factor obviously.

John UK wrote:
I am about to embark on following his dietary example, along with exercise and so on. I will be spending little time on the internet, but will maybe dip in from time to time. We must work while it is day, the night cometh when no man can work. There is plenty to do for the kingdom of God, so I aim to get some of my health back by eating and drinking sensibly, and get back to soldiering for the Lord with a cheerful countenance and a joy unspeakable and full of glory. This is my purpose, and none will dissuade me from it. Every blessing to all my dear friends here on SA.

If you are walking from your cave to the library to post, you should be in great shape getting all that fresh air and exercise. But if you're too sick to get out and serve God, why will dropping off the forum help you achieve health? Not that I think you should stick around and keep spreading your false doctrines and blowing smoke all over the forum per usual. I just don't believe you.

penny wrote:
NK is a closed off despot country filled with starving people, concentration camps and indoctrination including selling Americans as devils and their leader to be worshipped.

So who's to know which country is more worse off than another? I watched a documentary on North Korea recently, and it was nothing like what I'd been told about the country. Not that I agree with communism one single bit, but Israel is communist and nobody minds THAT. Communist Dictator Fidel Castro recently spoke that he is Morano Spanish crypto Jew, (ie fake Catholic). It's reported Cuba is run by Jews (as is the U.S.) Israel loves Castro and will be investing heavily in it in future. Google it.

John Yurich USA wrote:
When I stated I don't lust after any woman in my heart that is what I meant as I have disciplined myself to not even think about sex until I find the right woman to get married to and we get married and because I am under the guidance of the Holy Spirit not to think about sex until I get married.

Neil wrote:
I surmise that those voyeurs are probably computers using speech recognition software, in conjunction with watchlists containing "hot" words or names. I'm inferring this from what James Bamford wrote years ago in his book "The Puzzle Palace," back when NSA supposedly monitored only cross-border communications.
One can't really speak freely even in churches, lest one be accused of "grumbling & complaining" (quoting a tyrannical pastor we knew). So churches today are good training for citizens of a Police State: if you can't agree with what Preacher says, you must keep it to yourself.

Kinche wrote:
"The History of the Doctrine of the Atonement
The doctrine of definite atonement is not a Calvinist peculiarity. It is a mainstream doctrine which has been held by some of the greatest teachers in the Christian tradition, among them Augustine, Prosper of Aquitaine, Gottschalk, Peter the Lombard, Thomas Aquinas, Thomas Bradwardine, Gregory of Rimini as well as Calvin and the entire Reformed tradition. One should also remember that the nature of the controversy over the extent of the atonement has changed somewhat since the rise of Arminianism, the Remonstrants and the response by the Synod of Dort (1618–19). In the discussions before Dort, one often finds the elements of the doctrine of definite atonement, but because the question is not as sharply focused as it became in the early 17th century, the answers are not as detailed as they later were. This is the nature of the development of Christian doctrine, controversy often produces theological precision." (Prof R.Scott Clark)(Westminster Seminary)

John UK wrote:
It's a shame that you started off well with that post but then reverted to saying what you don't believe. This preaching Jesus, what exactly? Like this biblical example?:- Acts 8:32-35 KJV [Isaiah 53] 34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?
35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.

Mostly, in today's world, the teachings of Jesus in the gospels are the only thing that is keeping me sane these days the way things are going. People are becoming so cruel and selfish and wicked, more every day. Jesus warned us about all this, and because of being a Christian I actually rejoice in my suffering

John UK wrote:
However, you may like to explain how it is that "one drop of blood" is sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world. Imagine that you are telling this to a nonbeliever in the street, who knows nothing or next to nothing about Christianity. What are you going to say to him or her?

I actually did tell my own brother that PA stuff back in the day--have never had a chance to apologize to him. He's ended up not so good. It is very serious to corrupt someone with bad doctrine. I was going along with what passed for Christianity at the time, and I didn't have enough faith or understanding to resist, but anyway.

John UK wrote:
Philippians 3:12-14 KJV
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
The preacher likened it to a runner in a race, who prepared thoroughly for the run, and ran with all his heart, not looking behind him to see how others were doing, but in such a wholehearted way to reach out for that tape. All or nothing. I suppose you think that's calvin's twaddle as well.

AMillennialism wrote:
"My departure from premillennialism and embrace of amillennialism was gradual and came as a result of two discoveries as I studied Scripture. First, I devoted myself to a thorough examination of what the New Testament said would occur at the time of Christ's second coming (or parousia). What I found was a consistent witness concerning what would either end or begin as a result of our Lord's return to the earth. Sin in the lives of God's people, corruption of the natural creation, and the experience of physical death would terminate upon the appearance of Jesus Christ. Furthermore, the resurrection of the body, the final judgment, and the inauguration of the New Heavens and New Earth would ensue. But why is this a problem for premillennialism? Good question." (Sam Storms)
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2013/01/09/why-i-changed-my-mind-about-the-millennium/

TeenChristian wrote:
I tell you guys this out of live. I do not want you to die in a hospital bed hooked up to a machine! You guys look out for my spiritual health, I'm just looking out for your physical health.

John UK wrote:
Let us please put this "license to sin" heresy to bed. Paul the Apostle was falsely accused of preaching what is known today as antinomianism - cheap grace.

Paul was always warning sinners would go to Hell, listing specific sins. Calvinists love to slander St. Paul and say he was an evil sinner, hypocrite, going around preaching righteousness while he himself was the worst practicing sinner. Even tho they smear St. Paul, he's their favorite to wrest doctrine from, because they can twist things he says to make them think it's okay to be a sinner, even something to brag about, as you have done yourself; and if Paul could be the worst sinner then so can we.

Yes, penal atonement doctrine of wrath of God punishing Jesus for sins in advance is license-to-sin heresy.

John UK wrote:
my Christianity is a biblical Christianity, which is why I make all my arguments from scripture. I do not call it "blowing smoke" to quote wonderful verses from the Bible which explain the atonement made by the glorious Saviour.

These postings you are putting up are in a vacuum, how pious --

You won't defend your beliefs when somebody asks you to. You wait until the right moment to slip in the poison, even posing here as an anti-Calvinist when you are well beyond a 5 pointer in my view.

Very dishonest. If you don't believe in what you say, why are you here? If you have to dodge and weave, play dumb and blow smoke, change positions and colors from one day to the next, what is the purpose?

John UK wrote:
making false claims, telling lies continually, and sinning against God.

Not that I would really believe you anyway, but it would be interesting to see you actually refute things you've said in the past. I laid it all out, your beliefs, in my post below. So all you have to do is plainly state that you do not believe any particular thing I've said. Plainly state it. Don't be shy. Or if you have changed your mind about any of these heretical beliefs, then that's a good thing and nobody will hate you for it, certainly not me, and certainly not Jesus.

This is supposed to be a forum, a discussion, and posting Bible verses in a vacuum is blowing smoke.

Stop blowing smoke and hindering discussion of things that mean Heaven and Hell to the immortal souls of human beings.

John UK wrote:
I'm the one coming out with all the scriptures..

That God picked you on a whim from the foundation of the world, looked into the future and saw all the sins you were going to commit by his Sovereign will--and totalled them all up as to how much punishment would be required to "pay for them. (Which is another hellish heresy that God would cause people to sin and then pour wrath on Jesus for it)

So when Jesus went to the cross, God the Father poured out wrath on Jesus he'd been saving up against you, for all the sins you did, his "chosen," all totalled up to the last jot.

Paid in advance, no double jeopardy as you've said, no repentance needed, no "Indian-giving."

Ergo: soon as you agree to Jesus' penal atonement for you, you have license to sin and a speedrail to Heaven, as you've said.

If I have got any of this wrong, please tell me. Go ahead and deny any of it. If you really are not a 5 point Calvinist, then tell us.

Strat wrote:
Couldn't agree more,people one heartbeat from Hell worrying about Polar bears and melting ice caps,tossing and turning in their beds at night over Rain Forest and Spotted Owls while the clock tick tocks their life away and closer to the day of judgement.
Then you have Christians doing he same thing,the bible tells us how it will end and it involves a great deal of environmental destruction,it says nothing about a bunch of pantheist coming to the rescue and saving the day,the planet or anything else.
I can imagine God chuckling a bit when a sin laden Hell bound creature of his comes before him and expresses his or her concern for the.....planet.

Fukushima was a man-made disaster like Katrina, only worse. The Pacific Ocean is dying. Monsanto is poisoning us all. Chemtrails aren't ice crystals; the world-wide criss-crossing planes aren't spewing vitamins.

Christopher000 wrote:
Thanks for the mention on the commentary, Dorcas.

1. This doctrine is from Hell and John and Co. defend it w/dirty tricks and blowing smoke lest any soul gain an inkling that God's Truth in scripture is other than Hellish traditions and blasphemous lies sold by ravenous wolves to steal men's souls.

2. John and Co. want us to think God tortured and poured out wrath on animals sacrificed to God in the OT, sent scapegoats into the wilderness where God poured out wrath for the particular sins of the chosen (back then only Jews, but now others chosen by random at God's whim).

3. John and Co. sell license-to-sin from a God who can't and won't take sin away, only cover sin with a magic sheet the Father 'can't see' through. They say God vented wrath on Jesus on and off the cross, eye for an eye, for every Chosen's sin.

(see post below of John's imaginary friend US) says there's "no time with God." This is to support the No-Blood heresy: ergo "It is Finished" is meaningless Bible blather. Another UK John alias said: Jesus' teachings and parables are "vague analogies used by cults."

Bloodless Penal Atonement--damnable heresy!

Blood Atonement--Biblical truth!

Frank wrote:
Well brother, I have been following your posts and they were certainly edifying. I never dialogue with a heretic, but only debate.

Fact is, TULIP philosophy and logic doesn't hold up without the bloodless penal atonement: TULIP is all about if this, then that, then that and that and that.

You start out with a supposition, God is "sovereign" (pulling all the strings, nothing left to chance, and no free will) or He couldn't really be "sovereign."

So if you buy this (false) argument, then you move on to TULIP and end with a philosophy (not scripture) that says God picked people out of a hat to save, knew in advance what sins they would commit, and arranged for Jesus to be punished by God for each and every sin.

Penal(not blood) atonement.

So w/ John's doctrine of double jeopardy he's advanced on the forum, if a sin is paid for once, that's enough. You're bulletproof, no way to go to Hell if your sins were already punished by wrath of God on Jesus.