Featured The Extent of Jesus' Death

You are forcing a shade of meaning the text does not support.

The Arminian view of Christ’s atonement not only contradicts the biblical definition of Christ’s redemptive work, but also contradicts itself. An examination of three options regarding Christ’s death will prove that Arminianism is irrational. Jesus Christ paid the price and endured God’s wrath against sin for either: 1) all the sins of all men, 2) all the sins of some men, or 3) some of the sins of all men. If number 3 is true, then all men still have the guilt of some sins to answer for. This would mean that all men will go to hell, for it only takes the guilt of one sin to merit eternal damnation. If one holds to option 2, that Christ died for all of the sins of some men, then one believes that only some men (i.e., God’s elect) will be saved and go to heaven. This is simply biblical Christianity; that Christ actually achieved the salvation of all of God’s elect.

Brian Schwertley. (n.d.). Limited Atonement by Brian Schwertley.

 

sadly some do not accept God's plan of redemption, although the total price was paid. Christs death was sufficient to save all, some choose not to believe, as the parable of the sower shows, for different reasons

 

it is not that Christ dies for sins but for SIN , in its entirety ,total
Is not Christ death able to have saved ALL men?

 

Jesus told the pharisees in John 10 he did not die for them. And this was the reason they did not believe in him.

““I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.” (John 10:11)

“But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.” (John 10:26)

 

Good to see you back again. I got the boot for 2 months once but..................

 

If the price was paid they are saved. But the price was not paid. It wasn't paid for those that are not the elect.

Again, it would be wasted because it wasn't good enough to save if the price was being paid for all.

 

The word "especially" means in particular. In particular means SPECIFICALLY. So he saved all, specifically those who believed. It in no way means he is savior of all men in the way you all are trying to twist it.

 

“Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?” (Hebrews 10:29)

Unholy = κοινός, ή, όν (s. the numerous cognates that follow this entry; Hes.+) prim. ‘common’ (opp. ἴδιος)
① pert. to being of mutual interest or shared collectively, communal, common (so gener. Gk. lit., also LXX; EpArist, Philo, Joseph., SibOr).


Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 551). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 

The Scriptures teach the blood was shed for sin, all sin. No sin of the cosmos was not forgiven by the blood.

However, not so with the dead and resurrection.

The death and resurrection only benefit the believer.

“Christ gave His life a ransom for many,” shows that the life of Christ was particular not general.

If one reads the Scriptures with this principle (blood for all, death and resurrection for the redeemed) then all inconsistencies and conflicts of the statements cease.

 

None of those references do not change that one must change one's view or mind in order to believe to obtain the forgiveness of sins. (Acts of the Apostles 10:43). Not a single passage in the New Testament directly says change one's mind or view from one's sin. The prerequisite is faith. One has to change one's view or mind in order believe what one has not believed.

 

I think what's often confused is that the atonement and application of. The atonement was for all of mankind. But it's only applied to those who believe in Yeshua.

To be clear, I think Calvanism is an error, not a salvific one, but one that can turn off some who are seeking, which greaves me, as I'm pretty sure I have seen that very thing happen.

 

And when do little children who had died, repented and believed? (Mark 10:14) (Revelation 20:15)

 

Then it didn't atone for the sin of unbelief in the rest?

 

When do little children who die, choose to believe? (Mark 10:14) (Revelation 20:15)

 

The following is understood to refute the teaching of limited atonement, ". . . he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. . . ." -- 1 John 2:2 (1 John 5:19). Which is denied only by special pleadings.

 

Matthew 13
47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
51 Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.

 

What did God promise Abraham? That the whole gentile world would be blessed in him. Were all Jews saved? Are all gentiles saved?

 

Your reasoning and logic are human based which is quite often wrong when it comes to God's logic Dave.
Actually the text under study of the human author Peter needs no hermeneutic tampering and in fact has the effect of confounding the truth.

IMO you should leave it alone Dave.

Isaiah 55
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.