Featured God never designed or purposed to Save ALL men ever born.

Universalism is a false accusation. Luke 22:20 did include perishing Judas Luke 22:21-22.

 

And that does no negate Luke 22:20-21 included Judas.

 

Then he most certainly did NOT lay down His life for Judas since He, as He said, only laid down His life for the sheep.

 

Luke 22:20-21, ". . . Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. . . ." That plural "you" does not exclude Jesus' betryer.

 

Dr. Bob!!

Wow! It is such joy to see you back posting on the BB!

Ever the encouragement to me and how I trust you will participate most often.

Wisdom you share are as apples of gold!

 

I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.[Philippians 4:13]

 

If I follow the accounts, with John’s account being the ONLY one in which Judas departs, then the sequence must be that which I presented.

You are both claiming something that did not occur using Scriptures that do not support your thinking.

Here is the sequence as presented in Scripture by combining the gospel accounts:

• They sit and eat the prepared meal
• While eating folks noticed the Lord’s countenance change
• The Lord discusses the future and the betrayer
• Satan enters Judas’s heart
• John is ask to find out who is the betrayer
• Leaning on the Lord, the Lord quietly states it is the one dipping in the gravy
• The Lord tells Judas to get on with his business
• Judas leaves
• The Lord institutes the reason for taking the bread and juice
• They partake
• They sing a hymn and leave for the hill.

That is the sequence unless you can prove by Scripture it is in error.

 

so Jesus is wrong and you are right???

 

Luke 22:19-21

And He took bread and gave thanks, and He broke it and gave it to them, saying, This is My body which is given for you, this do in remembrance of Me. In the same way He took the cup, after having dined, saying, This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is being poured out for YOU. But, behold, the hand of My betrayer is with Me on the table"

That betrayeth (tou paradidontos). Present active participle, actually engaged in doing it. The hand of Judas was resting on the table at the moment. It should be noted that Luke narrates the institution of the Lord’s Supper before the exposure of Judas as the traitor while Mark and Matthew reverse this order. (A T Robertson)

From Luke's account it appears most clearly, that Judas was not only at the passover, but at the Lord's supper, since this was said when both were over (John Gill, Reformed)

By placing this after the institution of the Lord's supper, though in Matthew and Mark it is placed before it, it seems plain that Judas did receive the Lord's supper, did eat of that bread and drink of that cup; for, after the solemnity was over, Christ said, Behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. (Matthew Henry Reformed)

Luke is a first-class historian

Now shows that Judas did not hear the words from Jesus, "My blood, which is being poured out for YOU"; and that he was not part of the Lord's Supper, and took it with the other 11

There is zero contradictions in the Bible, except those created by those who refuse to accept what the Bible Teaches, for the sake of their personal doctrines!

 

yeah, like you refuse to accept Luke's account that Judas took the Lord's Supper!

 

The POINT is, that Jesus spoke the words about His blood being shed for YOU, in the presence of Judas. That Jesus gave Judas the Bread and Cup that represents His Body and Blood, which was also given for Judas. These are FACTS, not your theological FICTION!!!

 

Moot point/non-issue. @Reformed1689 nailed it on another thread.

 

Ok, I will admit I was in error.

This does fulfill some old testament statements, too.

Very good.

 

Faith is what God asks of man. But man's faith does not cause the new birth. John 1:13. 1 John 5:4-5, Revelation 3:5, Revelation 20:15.

 

We seem to differ in in some way our unnderstanding of Jesus being Savior of all men. I do not understand that to mean universalism. But rather He bought the gift of salvation on behalf all men that believe. Not that all men receive the gift. It must be received solely as a gift, Matthew 7:21-23.