Scott, you respond to me by saying:
[quote:a5eb02f2e2]There is a max number; the elect! God does not add to the elect as time goes on. The elect were chosen prior to the foundation of the world.....
As far as the power of the blood goes, the blood was shed only for the sheep; no one else. It is that powerful and precious. Everyone that has been given to Christ by the Father WILL come to Jesus. No more, no less! [/quote:a5eb02f2e2]
I 1000% agree! The elect were certainly chosen before the foundation of the world, their number and identity does not change from God's foundational decree. And Christ's blood was surely offered to satisfy the wrath of God on the elect only....not intended to justify those God had chosen to leave in their sin.
What I mean by the "max number" bit is this - Christ's work on the cross would be totally sufficient to atone for and redeem ANY number the Father had given Him before the foundation of the world. This the sum total of what I'm saying!
Of course, that number is fixed, and couldn't have been any other way, according to the mysteries and wisdom of His will.
By your response, I think you misunderstand what I am saying.
Here's another way of putting it:
Christ's blood is valuable enough to have purchased forgiveness for all the sinners in 10,000 worlds. In that sense, it is of infinite and unlimited value (sufficiency). But it was neither intended nor designed to do so. But its power is NOT the heart of "Limited Atonement," for every Arminian I know would gladly assent to its unlimited value, and every calvinist I know as well (until this discussion) - rather, it is the intent and effectiveness of the sacrifice that matters and distinguishes Reformed Theology. LA contradicts Arminian doctrine in that it is only intended to be propitiatory for the elect, and that it is absolutely and always effective in doing so.
Good citations, Westmin.
The atonement is limited in its intent, design, purpose, and efficacy.....but unlimited in its value (sufficiency).
Hope I didn't muddy the waters more, I'm hoping that's clear.
enjoying it as well, Scott...
[Edited on 6-15-2004 by smhbbag]
[quote:a5eb02f2e2]There is a max number; the elect! God does not add to the elect as time goes on. The elect were chosen prior to the foundation of the world.....
As far as the power of the blood goes, the blood was shed only for the sheep; no one else. It is that powerful and precious. Everyone that has been given to Christ by the Father WILL come to Jesus. No more, no less! [/quote:a5eb02f2e2]
I 1000% agree! The elect were certainly chosen before the foundation of the world, their number and identity does not change from God's foundational decree. And Christ's blood was surely offered to satisfy the wrath of God on the elect only....not intended to justify those God had chosen to leave in their sin.
What I mean by the "max number" bit is this - Christ's work on the cross would be totally sufficient to atone for and redeem ANY number the Father had given Him before the foundation of the world. This the sum total of what I'm saying!
Of course, that number is fixed, and couldn't have been any other way, according to the mysteries and wisdom of His will.
By your response, I think you misunderstand what I am saying.
Here's another way of putting it:
Christ's blood is valuable enough to have purchased forgiveness for all the sinners in 10,000 worlds. In that sense, it is of infinite and unlimited value (sufficiency). But it was neither intended nor designed to do so. But its power is NOT the heart of "Limited Atonement," for every Arminian I know would gladly assent to its unlimited value, and every calvinist I know as well (until this discussion) - rather, it is the intent and effectiveness of the sacrifice that matters and distinguishes Reformed Theology. LA contradicts Arminian doctrine in that it is only intended to be propitiatory for the elect, and that it is absolutely and always effective in doing so.
Good citations, Westmin.
The atonement is limited in its intent, design, purpose, and efficacy.....but unlimited in its value (sufficiency).
Hope I didn't muddy the waters more, I'm hoping that's clear.
enjoying it as well, Scott...
[Edited on 6-15-2004 by smhbbag]