The "L" part of TULIP..."Limited Atonenent".
Also known as "definite atonement" or "particular redemption".
Now...I'm going to take this post in an entirely different and political course.
On another blog, I'm hearing about our "Christian" Bible calling Jews "children of the devil" and I'm hearing about the sinful history of the persecution of Jews by Christians.
Yes. It happened. Yes. It was sin.
The popular epitaph is "Christ-killer".
Who took Christ's life?
John 10:17-18 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my lifeonly to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."
My first question: if Christ had not been crucified, where would we be? The "religious Jews" were instruments of God, prophecied. Jesus' death was the necessary sacrifice, ordained by the Father from the beginning of time. If God had demanded the sacrifice, are the people who brought that sacrifice about to blame?
Now...on to "the L".
From a Reformed perspective, who is responsible for the death of Christ? When I was an Arminian, my answer would have been "all of us".
But if I buy into the "L", that is not the right answer.
The short definition of "limited atonement" is: Christ's redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them.
If Christ's redeeming work was intended to save only those who would believe on Christ the Saviour, His blood in not on the hands of the Jews, it is not on the hands of unbelievers.
The blood of Christ is on my hands. My hands...the hands of a believer.
Romans 5:8-11 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through him! For if, when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! Not only is this so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.
That is the "L". The "L" lays the blame of Christ's death on me.
Moonshadow
I?m hearing about our ?Christian? Bible calling Jews ?children of the devil?
I find the Jewishness of the New Testament too often escapes me ... it's an intramural debate until at least 70 CE ... or even later. Now, how we've applied the text through the centuries ... he's spot on. And there are hard feelings yet:
"Despite the history of violence and bloodshed from the Christian world, said Rabbi Cohen, the invitation can also be seen as a declaration of 'respect and coexistence with Judaism as the older brother of Christianity.'
He said he actually felt a bit of trepidation in accepting the invitation because some rabbinical leaders feel that interreligious dialogue is simply another way of trying to convince Jews to become Christians, and some Jewish leaders opposed his addressing the synod. "
I'm tempted to say that, had Muslims had the political power that Christians had in Europe, they would have likewise abused it. But the tolerant example of the Ottoman Empire suggests otherwise.
sara
Ellen, How does limited atonement jive with 1 John 2:2?
Moonshadow
Ellen, How does limited atonement jive with 1 John 2:2?
Something from Wiki.
It's interesting to me that the English liturgy is supposed to change relative to this: "'for many' rather than 'for all'".
CWN Story, Nov. '06
sara
thanks.