Phil Bray

@Jondaphemp Dutch Reformed are the hyperest of hyper Calvinists

He was literally a calvinist.... Arminius was ordained in the Dutch Reformed Church in Amsterdam in 1588 and served as a pastor at the Old Church there until 1603. In 1603 he was appointed professor of theology at Leiden University, a position he held until his death. He initially affirmed the Calvinist understanding of predestination (election prior to the Fall). Over time, however, he came to question strict supralapsarian Calvinism as overly harsh and insufficiently attentive to human responsibility and God’s mercy. He

@NickQuient you are wrong. it is wednesday lol But Jesus still loves you

It is Tuesday. Which means Jesus still loves you.

@residentreformr Just be careful making definite claims like this. God told Peter “don’t call anything unclean that I have made clean.” And Peter understands this to mean humans, not animals. What the scapegoat did was “cleanse” Peter understood that humanity had been cleansed.

The scapegoat of Yom Kippur atoned for the sins of Israel. Jesus paid for the sins of true Israel, His Church, not the whole world.

@swamthetiber25 Right. i want the dung removed! not just covered up

I had a big aha moment. Many Protestants ascribe to Luther’s philosophy of the snow covered dung. We are declared righteous- when God sees us, He sees the Son. So there isn’t a need for purgatory because you’re “covered”. Of course, as a Catholic I know this doesn’t actually solve the issue. I don’t want to just be covered. I need to be transformed. I will be completely justified AND sanctified before heaven. When God looks at me, he’ll see ME who will be reflecting the Son. I will actually be righteous, not just declared.

@MikedAlamo @dgh5391 I would rather be judged by Jesus, than be stuck in the grave with no hope of any judgement. That seems to be what 1 Cor 15 is saying? But i’m not saying it’s a benefit to the lost soul. I’m saying that Jesus died for ALL. His death and resurrection is for all humanity

@Leviticus_isFun @dgh5391 In that all now face Christ as the judge of all men, but how is that a tangible benefit to the lost soul?

These two things are simultaneously true: A.) Christ did not die for all men; he died only for the sake of the elect. B.) We are commanded by Christ to freely and indiscriminately proclaim the gospel to all men everywhere. #marrow #marrowofmoderndivinity #marrowtheology

@MikedAlamo @dgh5391 So Jesus’ death and resurrection is still for ALL. Because now Jesus is the one who will judge. Death no longer has the final word

@MikedAlamo @dgh5391 I could be wrong about all being “raised.” But because of his death and resurrection, Jesus now holds the keys to Hades (death.) The powers of sin and death have been disarmed. Death as the final enemy has been destroyed. (1 cor 15)

@Jordan_Col_1_20 @dgh5391 So now, rather than Satan, Jesus is the one who will judge us. All will be raised. some to eternal life, some to shame and eternal destruction. But the judgement lies with Jesus. The final state doesn’t belong to death, Death was the last enemy to be defeated (1 cor 15:26)

@Jordan_Col_1_20 @dgh5391 Before Jesus death and resurrection humanity had no hope of resurrection. The grave (sheol/hades) was the end. And satan had the keys. But in his incarnation Jesus united humanity to himself. In his resurrection he defeated death and he now holds the keys.

@CatholicMic @joshwhitlatch can confirm

@joshwhitlatch False dichotomy. Go to a Catholic mass. The emphasis is on Jesus. Jesus. Jesus. Jesus. Christ centered.

Why did the Catholic Church put so much emphasis on Mary instead of Jesus?

@aspin3 @residentreformr Right. Would you agree with Moffitt that Jesus’ atonement happened primarily when he presented his resurrected self and his blood in the heavenly most holy place?

The issue is that you misunderstand what the atonement is and what Christ accomplished on the cross. He defeated death. He met the legal obligation that separated man from God/tore the veil that separated man from God in two such that sinful man can go before the holy God for mercy and forgiveness. No one was saved at the cross.Even in your own doctrine the atonement is not effectual until faith is applied

Everyone believes atonement is limited. The question is: who limits it?

@MikedAlamo @dgh5391 I have no hypothetical premise. Only scripture: Christ died for all. All will be raised. Some to everlasting life, some to shame and everlasting contempt. (Dan 12:2) Without Jesus' death and resurrection, death had the victory. But now Jesus holds the keys to Hades (death)

@dgh5391 All those who will come to object have a hypothetical premise in mind, the repentant non-elect person. That person has never and will never exist. We say to all, the message of John 3:16. If you repent and believe, you will be saved and are among the elect.

@DanSchwieder @residentreformr And the argument in Hebrews is that Jesus has done this but better. He is the great high priest who has made atonement in the heavenly most holy place.

@DanSchwieder @residentreformr Both. There was an offering for individual ritual impurty. But on Yom kippur the whole camp is purified. And at the end of the day, after sin has been removed by the scapegoat, atonement has been made, the whole congregation is “cleansed.” (Lev 16:30)

@Wombat11412 @AionianLife I think why I want to be careful with the wording, is that people have taken the next step to say that we are saved from God himself. “God saves us from Himself” is very problematic and not at all the language the Bible uses. Not in the Gospels, not Paul. Not Acts.

@Leviticus_isFun @AionianLife Oh, I agree, but hell is where the sentence is carried out.

Why is the threat of Hell (eternal conscious torment) one of Christianity’s core doctrines, yet the Apostle Paul fails to mention it even once? Did it slip his mind? Did he not want to offend anyone? Did the risen Christ forget to tell Paul? Think people, FGS, think . . .

@DanSchwieder @residentreformr Although the concept of kippur (cleansing) is present in the NT, the Greek word that translates the Hebrew kippur, never appears in the NT. So it’s best to define ritual atonement from the Hebrew first, and then see how that concept primary is being used in the NT

@DanSchwieder @residentreformr I’d define ritual atonement (kippur in the OT) as the act of removing sin, impurity & defilement. It may be understood as purge, wipe away, remove, but the result is the thing or the person is “cleansed”

@MikedAlamo @DanSchwieder @residentreformr I was responding to Dan. Sorry if the replies got mixed up.

@MikedAlamo @DanSchwieder @residentreformr you jumped onto the wrong thread here i think Mike. I’m not meaning to be rude. we were having a polite conversation

@MikedAlamo @residentreformr Older scholarship defines kippur as “cover” but you’ll find recent scholarship will lean towards wipe away, purge. (Jacob Milgrom, Michael Morales, Mark Scarlata, Mary Douglas). The shift is due to the discovery of the Akkadian and the associated Hittite & Babylonian rituals

@MikedAlamo @residentreformr The definition of “cover” comes mostly from the Arabic. For a long time that’s the closest cognate we had to Hebrew. But with the discovery of the Akkadian texts at Nineveh scholars have discovered a much closer cognate that’s used in Hittite “scapegoat” rituals