Jason, you quoted yourself and gave me the credit. Where did I commit eisegesis? Where did I assume anything?
I simply need to know if we should take the atonement as a universal attempt(1Joh 2:2) to salvage all mankind, or an accomplished sacrifice(Matt 1:21) for a specific peoples.
averagefellar said: I simply need to know if we should take the atonement as a universal attempt(1Joh 2:2) to salvage all mankind, or an accomplished sacrifice(Matt 1:21) for a specific peoples.
Your question is evolving and changing. First, it was just about a couple of verses. After I explained the verses and showed that you weren't supporting one side of the argument with this particular verse, you left that argument from the verse and started asking the general questions that you're asking now.
Since you do not have a tenable argument from Matthew 1:21, I think you can answer your own question. Can't you?
I'm here to discuss alleged Bible errors. If you can't find one or don't know one, then that is perfectly fine. So far, you haven't illustrated that these verses contradict each other. On the other hand, I have shown how they do not contradict each other.
Sincerely, Jason _________________ Jesus Christ Saves Ministries http://www.jcsm.org Over 60,000+ web pages! 500+ Israel pictures, Bible lessons, weekly devotions, lots of MP3 files, free email accounts, and much more.
First, while I see Jesus' ministry taking place in a time bound world, I don't think His mission was necessarily evolving.
Joh 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
Some christians think this verse says Jesus will accomplish a specific task, that being salvation of His people.
Quote
Matthew 1:21 (NASB) "She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."
Some christians claim Jesus death was only for the elect, and this verse seems to uphold their position. They don't see the mission of Christ as evolutionary but as part of a covenant God made with His people, wether they be Jews, Greeks, gentiles or inuits. Men like Calvin, Augustine, Bahnsen, White and Horton take this view.
John Gill takes this view;
Quote
By "his people" whom he is said to save are meant, not all mankind, though they are his by creation and preservation, yet they are not, nor will they be all saved by him spiritually and eternally; nor also the people of the Jews, for though they were his nation, his kinsmen, and so his own people according to the flesh, yet they were not all saved by him; many of them died in their sins, and in the disbelief of him as the Messiah: but by them are meant all the elect of God, whether Jews or Gentiles, who were given to him by his Father, as a peculiar people, and who are made willing in the day of his power upon them, to be saved by him in his own way.
However, some christians claim Jesus didn't bring salvation to only His people, but to the whole world, and that all now have a chance to choose Christ. They use this verse as their support;
Quote
1John 2:2 (LITV) And He Himself is the propitiation relating to our sins, and not relating to ours only, but also relating to all the world.
They claim Jesus died for the sins of all mankind. That Jesus death makes salvation available to all. Men like Finney, Wesley, Arminius, the pope and Crouch take this view.
Scofield takes this view;
Quote
1Jo 2:2 - propitiation (Greek, "hilasmos", "that which propitiates"). (See Scofield) - (Rom_3:25). the sins Omit words "the sins". world Greek, "kosmos", means "mankind". (See Scofield) - (Mat_4:8).
The possible contradiction is a most serious one, that has served to create a huge schism in christianity. Even the scholars contradict each other on the very interpretations of these two passages, not to mention the very passages themselves. As somebody who is trying to understand all sides (so as not to misrepresent either), I just wondered how they worked together, being that Jesus surely accomplished His purpose.
If you would rather move on, I will understand. and I won't bother with it any longer as well.
While this is an important issue, it isn't an essential doctrine. The doctrine of salvation is an essential doctrine. Therefore, it is good to avoid things that could divide us; at least in this thread. This thread is about alleged Bible errors. Whether or not this is a "pet issue" with you, I do not know. However, I do see how you turned a thread designed to discuss alleged Bible errors into a conversation about a doctrine that divides Christians.
I'm going to stick to the topic and wait and see if anyone has questions about the Bible's inerrancy; or passages that they think contradict. Incidentally, the first one you quoted and assumed referred to salvation didn't mention salvation. It seems that this is an important issue for you, so I recommend starting a new thread for it.
I assure you that how we view the atonement is quite essential. So essential that the reformers paid a significant price to expose the errors of Rome concerning it. How we view Christ and Gods purpose is incredibly important. While it does indeed divide, we need to work on understanding the Bible concerning this, to bring us back into unity.
averagefellar said: I assure you that how we view the atonement is quite essential. So essential that the reformers paid a significant price to expose the errors of Rome concerning it. How we view Christ and Gods purpose is incredibly important. While it does indeed divide, we need to work on understanding the Bible concerning this, to bring us back into unity.
If you are saying it's important, then you are underscoring what I have said. If you are saying that one's belief on the subject of predestination will effect their eternal destiny, then you have distorted or misunderstood the gospel message (http://gospel.jcsm.org) and you are incorrect.
Thank you for starting the new thread. Right now, I will only address alleged Bible errors and will remain in the original thread. I'm sure others will join you, though.
God bless, Jason _________________ Jesus Christ Saves Ministries http://www.jcsm.org Over 60,000+ web pages! 500+ Israel pictures, Bible lessons, weekly devotions, lots of MP3 files, free email accounts, and much more.
I'm going to visit this topic periodically and see if anyone asks questions regarding alleged Bible errors. Feel free to post here if you have one. I've written a complete rebuttal to The Skeptic's Annotated Bible; which is an exhaustive atheist commentary on the Bible. See http://skepticsannotatedbible.com . I'd be happy to share answers from my book (see http://skepticsannotatedbible.org ).
May God richly bless you.
Sincerely, Jason Gastrich _________________ Jesus Christ Saves Ministries http://www.jcsm.org Over 60,000+ web pages! 500+ Israel pictures, Bible lessons, weekly devotions, lots of MP3 files, free email accounts, and much more.
Jason, Could you explain how exactly your book is different from other well know books attempting to give answers to apparent Bible problems? Say for instance Gleason Archer's Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties or Halley's handbook on Bible Difficulties? Or, for that matter, Peter Ruckman's classic, sure to go down in the annals of history, Problem Texts?
I haven't read Gleason's book or the other work you mentioned. I'm unable to compare them. However, my CD-ROM is bundled with a bunch of great resources like 450+ awesome pictures from Israel, the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible and the Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary, the entire KJV Bible with Strong's numbers, Easton's Bible Dictionary, Matthew Henry's Exhaustive Commentary, Nave's Topical Index, and Torrey's Topical Index. A palm pilot edition and the gospel message is also included.
The workbook that accompanies the CD-ROM has 300 questions regarding alleged Bible errors. The answers are in the back, so the workbook can be used as a self-test, a personal Bible study, a group lesson plan, etc.
