Okay Sola Scripturites: Where does the word "atone" appear in the NT, what is the Greek (hilasmos?) and what does it mean? What does the KPR stem mean in Hebrew. Is "Atone" really the best translation - since it is, after all a made up word.
Hint: Love ***covers*** a multitude of sins. (That's in the Bible, kids.) Calypso anyone? Apo-calypso?
This is SUCH a bogus fight! I can;'t believe it. We have a made up English word which was MADE UP (I"m guessing, though Tyndale comes to mind) to provide a term for all the multitude of images used to describe what IHS accomplished in His life and death and rising. We have the atomistic, sort of time-and-deeds-come-in-chunks view whether Jesus was sort of marking time up until he got crucified, or maybe up until the period from Holy Thu PM to Easter Morning.
OR we have the view that starts with God's word "Let there be light," and will end only in the unimaginable consummation and every minute was God saving us through His creating, redeeming, re-creating Word.
And in the infinite and incomprehensible vastness of the Providential Vision and Love we have a few hundred words attempting to convey what cannot be adequately conveyed by any number of words. But those who would reduce God to some tiny Procrustean bed of a theological system find fault because their formulaic expressions, based on a word with roots in 14th century English, are not echoed word for word in somebody else's words.
Sometimes you just have to wonder what is going on here, except that I'm pretty confident Satan gets a kick out of it.
So is Satan merely getting a laugh out of this? Or is it ultimately his doing to begin with?
Rom 3:25 — Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
1Jo 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.
1Jo 4:10 — Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son [to be] the propitiation for our sins.Transliteration hilasmos
Part of Speech masculine noun Outline of Biblical Usage
1) an appeasing, propitiating
2) the means of appeasing, a propitiation
Hint: Love ***covers*** a multitude of sins. (That's in the Bible, kids.) Calypso anyone? Apo-calypso?
The blood of the sacrifices in the OT covered the sin/ atoned for the sin of the man..but that did not cover future sin ..He had to keep going back and REOFFERING sacrifices to cover his sin.. BUT we have a better high Priest
Hbr 10:12 — But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
Rom 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
Hbr 10:14 — For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
Jud 1:1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, [and] called:
Hey, Bro . . .
I remember what super painful coughing is like . . . cracked ribs etc.
Some have insisted that onions—some say cut open and nearby and some say boiling in a pot in the room . . . can help congestion tremendously.
Prayers anyway.
LUB
“This is SUCH a bogus fight! I can;’t believe it. We have a made up English word which was MADE UP (I”m guessing, though Tyndale comes to mind) to provide a term for all the multitude of images used to describe what IHS accomplished in His life and death and rising.”
Tyndale would be innocent - as you noticed, atonement doesn’t appear in the New Testament. It is pulled over from the Old Testament as an analogy, perhaps - but it was not needed to explain the Gospel in the New. That is why it is silly to argue about using the word atonement...it is a useful idea, but not used in the NT. Use it if it helps you to understand a concept, but realize the word itself is absent.
At least in the translations I searched.
For Sola Scriptura, it is probably best to leave it with what scripture says.
First, we have the example of the Lord and the Apostles using scripture to give authority to their words. Even Jesus, although he also skipped using it and claimed full authority for Himself.
Second, we have the example of the Bereans, who searched the OT to see if what Paul was teaching was true. I believe there is a passage in the OT about not believing a miracle worker for the miracles, but comparing the miracle workers teaching against God’s previous revelation. I’ll try to find it again.
Third, we have what Paul told Timothy:
A) “how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” While referencing the OT, if the OT can make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, how much more the New! After all, “1 Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.”
B) “16 All Scripture is God-breathed” Sorry folks, but it isn’t the Catholic Church, or the African Councils in 400 AD that makes scripture authoritative - it is God. God’s breath, breathed into Adam to give him life: “7then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.” If you wish to live, seek God’s breath!
C) “and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,” It wasn’t meant to be dropped in one’s lap and left, although many have benefited from even that. It was meant to be used by leaders and teachers, humans, obeying God, using scripture for “teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”.
D) “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” The end result. Not so we can cleverly beat each other over the noggin in intellectual debates, but so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. And yes, it says thoroughly equipped and every good work.
If you want to teach something external as non-binding, go ahead. But if it must be believed to be saved or to live a good life, then no.
And if it contradicts scripture, then no.
Of course, anyone taught by anyone else about the meaning of scripture cannot be prevented from going off the deep end. I’ll be honest - when I first read about the ULI in TULIP, I figured it was a joke. I had to go read Calvin myself before I believed that it wasn’t a hoax.
I can show why I believe my beliefs accord with scripture, but after that...every man will give an account of his life to God someday. Make sure what you believe is sincere and the result of study - of taking God seriously, and thus His Word seriously. I cannot answer for you, nor you for me. Let us teach each other, make each other search the scriptures and our own hearts, and then do as we believe God wants. Being sinful men, we’ll mess up a fair bit, most likely.