The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum What is the Lombardian Formula

Came across something new this morning - Lombardian Formula. It deals with the atonement, and from some googling has it been re-formulated by those in the Reformed community. Is it just strictly - sufficient for all; efficient for the elect?

Sounds like limited atonement restated?

These articles below might help. And who cares what Lombard mused about the atonement? Scripture is the source everyone should be basing their views upon and the standard by which all other opinions are judged. There are quite a number of opinions to be found via Google, and most are unabashedly biased toward Universalism, i.e., Christ died for ALL MEN but only the elect receive the benefits of His atonement. And as usual, those who hold to particular/definite/limited atonement are maligned, misquoted and maliciously rejected, e.g., Robert Allen.

- Sufficient For All
- The "Duel Reference" View of the Atonement
- The Extent of the Atonement

Think that many who go against the view of limited atonement have a misunderstanding of what we mean by that term!

And what do you mean by the term?

God intended purpose in the death of Jesus was as the sin bearer for the elect of God, so that God had provided for them real atonement, and a real salvation! The blood of Jesus purchased the salvation of all those whom God intended to get saved by it...

1. Do believe that statement is an essential truth of the Gospel?
2. If you do, then aren't those who do not believe that statement believing in another Gospel, which Paul condemns in 2Cor 11:2-4 and Gal 1:7-9?
3. And if they are believing in another gospel, another Jesus and in fact another God, aka: idolatry, contrary to the God of the Bible, do want to maintain that they are saved?

There Are Only Two Religions in the Whole World

The summary of the content of the Gospel is stated about 24 years after the death of our Lord Jesus Christ
.
1Cor.15 1] Moreover, brethren,
I declare unto you the gospel
which I preached unto you,
which also ye have received,
and wherein ye stand;
[2] By which also ye are saved,
it ye keep in memory
what I preached unto you,
unless ye have believed in vain.

This was the main focus of his preachng, the primary teaching , first of all,
consisting of which are three points.

[3] For I delivered unto you, "first of all."
that which I also received,
how that Christ died for our sins
according to the scriptures;
[4] And that he was buried,
and that he rose again the third day
according to the scriptures:

how that Christ died for our sins, must be given special notice, since it explains the focus of the death of the Lord Jesus Christ

Paul specifically refers to "Christ died for our sins" referring to himself and the Corinthian believers, he calls this the Gospel, and says nothing concerning Christ's death being sufficient for all, made available for all, provided salvation for all, or even was intended for all.

Of course this does not apply to these two groups only, "himself and the church at Corinth."

In Acts 20:28 Paul clarifies that it applies to all of those secured by Christ's death by referring to them this way, "he hath purchased the church with his own blood." Again the death of the Lord Jesus Christ, was specific, focused, and particular as to its intention.

Paul says this is the message that saves. So the question is, can another message be the Gospel, than the one which Paul refers to. Of course not

Would say that MOST would hold to the truths of being a sinner, jesus died for their sins, and that receiving Him thru faith alone can save them!
Those not reformed would see themaelves as putting faith in Jesus, but that is due to a faulty view regarding that, but does not mean were not able to get saved!

So only Reformed calvinists are able to get saved then?

As is typical of you, I asked you 3 specific questions and you have refused to answer them. Your response, quoted here, is again nothing more than a recitation of your view which I have repeatedly refuted with Scripture and sound reasoning. Do you really think that if you repeat your view it will somehow make it true?

Those who you constantly refer to as being "saved" have put their free-will decision/faith in ANOTHER god, ANOTHER Jesus and in ANOTHER gospel other than what the Apostles preached, which cannot save anyone. True faith embraces the One True God, the biblical Christ and the "faith once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 1:3). Simply saying that you are a sinner is a far different thing than one possessing a Spirit-wrought conviction of sin which makes one loathe himself and brings heart-felt guilt. True faith always accompanies desperation and repentance. Rarely do these things exist among those whom you would declare saved.

The Holy spirit Himself enabled them to received the real Jesus thru the gift of faith, so why would they not be saved? Do you see only calvinists as really saved by grace of God then?

Once again, you have avoided answering my questions. And, we have been through this before several times. The Holy Spirit simply does not and CANNOT use falsehood to save those for whom Christ died. He uses truth. You keep digging the hole you are in deeper and deeper bifurcating truth from God with the intent of creating a "big tent" type of Christianity, which Scripture clearly rejects.

JesusFan
I am not sure why you keep approaching the subject in this manner.
If you want to persue this matter, perhaps you might want to address the points given one at a time. It is quite frustrating reading how you are communicating.
Even if you were correct on the matter, you sure are not doing justice to your side.

Tom

The scriptures state that Jesus died for sinners, rose again to justify those saved, and that the Holy Spirit work is to bring the elect to saving knowledge and faith in Jesus, so whether the person right at conversion holds with or even knows Tulip, does that really matter? isn't most of what we call calvinistic theology learned after salvation?