I've Been Amusing Myself
In addition to being centered around an atonement theory I've already studied up on, this discussion is a rich source of the same kind of statements discussed in the series I posted recently called Thinking About Faith Alone and Christ Alone. (You can access all those posts from that link.) Here are some I could have added to the collection discussed there:
Man's sin is paid for in advance but, the condition [for salvation] isn't only having our sins paid for. You see that condition has been paid but, if there is no repentance and confession. The rest of the entire condition [for salvation] has not been met.Can you see how this statement is a denial of Solus Christus, which affirms that what Christ did is sufficient for our salvation?
How about this?
Yet there is ONE sin that is UNPARDONABLE - Rejection of the Son - UNBELIEFYep, another denial of Solus Christus by the denial of the sufficiency of Christ's work. Christ's work was not sufficient grounds upon which the sin of unbelief could be pardoned.
Want more? The brackets in this one are original.
The atonement was done for all time for all in Christ Jesus. . . .Christ's atonement, if this statement is true, is not sufficient grounds for forgiveness. We must add our confession to his work, thereby providing some of the grounds by which we are pardoned.
But since we did not sacrifice ourselves, thereby personally asking forgiveness, forgiveness became a different thing -- a personal thing. If not, then John would have never needed to say that if we confess our sins [then] He is faithful to forgive them. That is indeed an if/then proposition and not an accomplished fact on the Cross.
I could go on, but I won't. I have a life. At least I think I do.