For Whom Did Christ Die? - C.H. Spurgeon

2 peter says that Jesus "bought" unsaved, false prophets. that right there helps prove that Jesus shed his blood for everyone and not just the so called "ELECT"

Also In Hebrew 10:29 we are told that a man can go to hell AFTER being santified by the blood of the covenant.. Is that referring to a Christian that is "ELECT" and then loses it?

well if it isn't one of the "ELECT" then it has to be referring to an man who is not saved and yet is santified by the blood. Now can anyone (Calvinist) explain how an unsaved man can be santified by the blood when the blood was only shed for the "Elect"???

That is at least two places in your bible that expressly says that the blood of Jesus was shed for everyone.

1 Timothy 2:4

"Who will have ALL MEN to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth"

 

Yup! Christ died for all without exception. However those who cling to your type of argument are misunderstanding sovereignty. Christ died for the sins of all men. That is why nobody will receive eternal judgment because of his personal sins. You keep on implying that if Christ died for all men yet there are those who will go to hell, then Christ's death is not really that effective. Again this is a misunderstanding on your part. Souls that are punished are so condemned not because of their sins - since Christ already paid for those - but because of their unbelief in Christ. Christ's payment for the sins of a soul does not automatically make that soul acceptable to God the Father. A soul must be as rigtheous as God to be accepted by God not merely a soul who has paid its debt, God being absolute righteousness and perfect justice. There is still a need for imputation of Christ's rigtheousness, and this is accomplished through unmeritted faith in Christ.

Also, God's sovereignty is NOT self-limiting, as your argument implies. God, in His absolute sovereignty, has decided to give men freedom to choose for or against Him, and He so applied it in giving salvation.

 

I am curious........does this thread think that men are saved in a *different manner* than men were saved prior to the Cross of Jesus Christ?

If so, How has it changed? If it in fact, has not changed, how are men saved? By faith? And if by faith, how does one achieve faith? Is it God given? If it is God given, does God give faith to all? If faith is not given to all and men in the past were saved by faith (prior to the cross, looking forward to it's glory, after the cross, looking back at it's glory,) would it not be preposterous to think Christ died for men that He did not give faith to? Or are you implying that God gives faith based upon something that His creation does to warrant the worthiness of the gift?

Scott adds:
Was the OT sacrifices ever intended to reach above and beyond Gods people? In other words, When the priests sacrificed, were the sacrifices also for Egypt?

*Please re-read Ch 11 of Hebrews, better known as the "Hall of Faith".

Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

In HIM,
Scott Bushey

[ April 26, 2002, 07:24 AM: Message edited by: Scott Bushey ]

 

Chris:
There are many scriptures that teach Christ died for all. I simply used one. Here are a couple more for you.(Jn. 3:16, I Jn. 2:2). By the way, Jesus used proof texting. Jesus asked the pharisees in the gospel of John, " Is it not written in your law that ye are Gods?" This is a reference to Psalms 86. I thnk Jesus is a good example to follow don't you?
However, Jesus did not make unsubstantiated assertions.
You have not given me any scripture that proves he died for the elect only. If you think that is possible,please harmonmize them with just the three I have posted.
Frank

 

With respest to the topic: Me.

 

James:
Yes, the Bible teaches this.( Hebrews 5:8,9,II Thes.1:6-9, Mat.7:21, Mk. 1:15, Romans 1:16, Romans 16:26, Rev.1:3). No, men must submit to the sovereign will of God to be saved. Servants follow the will of the Master. They must comply with his wil. (Mat.7:21).
Men do not accept Christ because they do not believe.( Hebs.3:12).They are not willing to submit to him-selfishness. All sin is related to this problem. Some had rather have the physical pleasures of this life over eternal salvation.( I Jn. 2:15-17, II Tim. 4:10). Those in John six folowed him no more when they realized it was not just a physical reward system for the flesh. There are many others, of course.
Yes, men may be lost who were once saved.( I Tim. 1:18,19, II Tim. 2:17-19, IiTim.4:10, Rev.20:10, Rev.21;27). There would be absolutely no need for the warning of apostasy if it were not possible.( I Jn.4:1, IITim.4:1-4, Jude 4).
Salvation is a gift of God.(Romans 6:23). It must be received through faith.( Eph.2:8,9). This faith must be active to access grace.(Hebrews 11:6, Romans 5:1,2). EVERY TIME faith is not active in the Bible it is a dead faith.(James 2;26). Can a dead faith save?
A working faith is in the redemption that Christ provided for us. It is his will that I have faith in him that is demonstrated buy following his will. Just as a servant does for the master. We are still unpofitable even at that.Therefore, I cannot boast because I have only done what God has required. It is he who justifies and saves. It is Christ who is above every name and can glory in what he has so graciously done for us. Finally, my children do not boast because they obey me. They do so out of love for me. They can never "earn" all that has been done for them. Just as I could never earn or merit all my parents did for me. However, God requires them to obey their parents. By doing so, they have simply done as he has willed. In like manner, there is no boasting in receiving the gift of salvation. It is not meritorious nor can it be. However, it does require men to be faithful.( Rev.2:10, IITim.4:6-8, Hebs.11:6). Why? Because the Lord said for us to be.
Frank

 

Im going to simply run through the "basics"

Adam created with "Free Will" but not fallen
Adam falls all descendants fall

In reference to fall - it means we are cursed with a fallen nature but not sin. "Age of Innocence" and all that

Pre-Christ the "Dispensation(s)" that were revealed were incapable of saving anyone - but rather they served as a signpost a blazing arrow to the future and the fulfillment of God's promise to Adam and Eve concerning their descendant who will crush the serpent (that being the devil). Those who believed in God and obeyed Him; were in fact looking forward to their ultimate descendant. That beng Jesus Christ. There is a verse in reference to David doing this very thing.

All OT people who either PERFECTLY followed the law; or looked forward to the fulfillment of the promise in faith were saved.

Mid Testament falls under same procedure as OT. If yer patient I will explain the procedure a wee bit more in depth.

NT - pre-Christ same as OT - during Christ the promise is fulfilledl; all anyone has to do is believe in Christ as the Messiah; and obey Him. The conditions do not change ever after - well unless we want to get into end-time eschatology.

The process of life and death and salvation

Man is born unregenerate - but he has no sin on his soul

If man dies before gaining conciousness enough to be held accountable for his actions (that age can vary from 2 - never) he goes to heaven

Every man because of his unregenerate nature will tend to sin - so pretty much a minute or two after age of innocence lapses man is guilty of sin.

Now Christ has paid the price for all sins for all time - BUT that gift must be accepted. Of course since man is unregenerate he will not accept.

However Christ has made a way for man to be regenerated. Through the Word and testimony of God. This can refer to MAINLY and should be considered the PRIMARY if not ONLY method of regeneration so as to encourage evangelism - Yep you got it the Bible - the inerrant - inspired - and eternally RELEVANT Word of God. However there is a "secondary" method of regeneration which is the testimony of God - this refers to ALL of creation.

Thus can ALL men be held accountable for even just the sin of rejecting Christ and His gift of grace.

 

TO ALL OF YOU THAT RESPONDED TO MY LAST POST;
I will try to respond to each of you, but I am having trouble with the FAMOUS AOL service knocking me off the internet half way through my responses, so I keep losing everything and it is getting very frustrating. What do you guys use for your internet provider. I'm about sick and tried of AOL and their rotten service.

I will try one more time starting with KJV1611:
Thanks for your thoughts. Yes I can say that a DEAD person can't accept anything, and of course, after a person is dead it is to late to reject anything regarding salvation, is what this whole discussion is about.
If a person is not regenerated he has no desire, or ability to "accept" anything. After he is dead it is too late. I don't think anyone here thinks a person gets a second chance after death. I'm posting this before AOL knocks me off again.
James2

 

Part II to Brother KJV1611:
Wow, I'm still on the internet. For the life of me, I can't find the scripture in Peter you are referring to. I'm familiar with it, but need to read it in context again. Could you get me the exact verses?
Heb. 10:29-- Reminds me of the parable about the sower and the seed. Of course some people can be even sanctified, believe to a degree, etc. and the bible is full of such examples, yet they were still lost and not part of the elect. Being "sanctified" and being part of the elect are two separate things. (sorry, I've having a hard time focusing because I keep expecting to have everything erased by AOL and having to start over).

As for Jesus dying for ALL men, those scriptures have been debated over and over on other threads. No sense repeating the same explanations. Maybe I will include John Gill's comments:

http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/comments/gill/1timothy2.htm

I'm going to post this part now.

 

MikeJ:
I guess I missed your floating abstraction masquerading as a concept.
James2

 

I'm sorry, Helen. But your own statements contradict your premise that Jesus Christ died for all men. Many certainly does not have the same meaning as all. As for

shouldn't the Holy Spirit, in His exactness, have caused Peter to write

You were quoting 2 Pet. 3:9 and did not bother to think of the context. To whom was the apostle addressing the letter ? Was it to all men ? Or was it to

You also said

I'm not a Calvinist.
But sovereignty is not what you describe. You are describing someone who has no will at all, no strength, no character, no rule. You're describing a wimp. No offense meant.
A husband is most certainly sovereign in his house and home. He lays the ground rules, he lays the penalty for breaking the ground rules. Yet he loves those of his household. However, his love does not include sitting down and letting everyone do their own thing and hope that they'll look around and see him and realize what a wonderful, loving husband and father he really is and they have totally wrecked their lives and the home he has provided and repent.
He decides who stays and does not stay in his house. Period.
God is sovereign above all, and above everyone, but Himself. He cannot overrule Himself. He very clearly told Adam, "on the day thou eatest of it thou shalt surely die" and that was the basis of Paul's "the wages of sin is death" in Romans.
From that day on, Adam's posterity died along with him, spiritually, and began to die physically as well. No one deserves mercy
among all men. All deserved hell, and all would be going to hell if God had not exercised His sovereign prerogative to be merciful to whom He (not us) wants to be merciful.
The wonder is that there are those who are saved.
You Arminians say that you are the ones who truly
know how to appreciate the sovereignty of God.
In fact, your reasoning puts Him in a box. You box Him in His attributes and character. You expect Him to be merciful because He is God. But what about justice and righteousness ?
God is merciful, which is why He chose whom He will save out of Adam's posterity who are
already hellbound from inception because of Adam's disobedience and that is His prerogative.
And God is just and righteous, which is why He gave His only begotten Son who took unto Himself the punishment that sinners deserve, therefore, the penalty for those whom God chose to save in Christ, is paid for.
Jesus Christ is the gift of God to His people.
That is 100% grace, none of the recipient, all of the giver.
Arminianism is a subtle form of humanism. It bends God's will to man's.

 

Aki:
Let's see, now. The wages of SIN is death. Death came through one man, because that one sinned. I don't have time to go through all this now, but I'll try.

I do believe in an atonement that actually atones for something. Aren't you mixing a few things up? If the atonement paid the price for every single person, and all their sins, past, present and future why do the scriptures warn so much about disobedience etc.? For example, in Eph. 5, it talks about certain types of people not inheriting the kingdom, God not being mocked etc.

Anyway, so God determines (according to you) salvation based on belief. Aren't you begging the question just a little? How does one believe? On their own, without the free gift of God?

Once again, a person DEAD in tresspasses and sin not only does not want to believe, he is unable to believe unless regenerated, justified by faith, having the righteousness of Christ imputed to him, and all this as a free gift.
You say there is "still a need" for the imputed righteousness of Christ. Come on now, THAT IS the only way. After a sovereign act of God, regeneration, will a person even realize that he has a need of a savior. And a savior from what. My understanding is from the power and presence of SIN. I think I understand what you are trying to say, but I don't think sin has been abolished for EVERY SINGLE PERSON WITHOUT EXCEPTION. I mean, in Romans, what was Paul struggling with. It most certainly wasn't UNBELIEF.

So, without the free gift of grace and a sovereign act of God, no one would believe or even want to believe. (AOL is being ok at the moment).
Have to get to work. Will try to respond to the rest of you later.
James2

 

Sularis:
What happened to Original Sin? You say people are born without sin in their soul?
Wow, I really don't have time to respond to all this now.

A person under 2 goes to heaven automatically? Is there some new way of salvation i'm not aware of? By your logic, people that kill their unborn would be doing them a favor because they would automatically go to heaven. Could you point out where you get the idea from. or is that just man wanting to deny original sin and make up what sounds good?

No matter how you want to state it, you are saying that salvation is up to man. In other words, man saves HIMSELF, by his SOVEREIGN CHOICE. I find that absolutely not support in scripture and very God dishonoring. Once again, you are making man's so-called choice, the grounds for salvation, not the regenerating work of Christ.

Why does man find it almost impossible to give up this idea that their salvation depends on free will, choice, man, me etc.
I can't say much more. God is Sovereign and He does as he pleases, when He pleases, and his actions, wills, plans, Sovereignity can not be thwarted by the "choice" of man. If man had "free choice" and it was up to him, then all would be it hell. Period. Since every single person born is born under a death sentence I would say so much for free will. What's "free" about that.

FOR ALL OF YOU THAT I DON'T HAVE TIME TO RESPOND TO: I respectfully refer you to some of the great essays on this subject that are available. Please go to this site:
http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/calvinism/L.asp

All you great brothers in Christ, let me know what you think about those essays. Try to be objective and open-minded.
Peace

[ April 26, 2002, 01:57 PM: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

 

Well,now, this kinda makes me think:
that a fish could fly long distances if it wills to, without divine intervention on its nature;
that a bird could stay underwater forever if it wills to, without divine intervention on its nature;
that whales can walk on land if they will to, without divine intervention on its nature;
that poisonous snakes can get rid of their poison at will without divine intervention on its nature;
that poison ivy will not bring rashes on if it wills to, without divine intervention on its nature;
that a leopard can change its spots if it wills to, without divine intervention on its nature;
that the Ethiopian can change the color of his skin if he wills to, without divine intervention on his nature;
that sinners can turn to God if they will to without divine intervention on their nature.

can they all ?

 

To Everyone that addressed me:
I see that my home computer business is just starting to take too much time right now for me to deal in any way that does justice to your well thought out, well researched comments.
Rather than making comments right off the top of my head I think I will withdraw from most of the threads for awhile.
But thanks to everyone and God bless
James2

 

pinoybaptist you said that 2nd Peter ch 3:9 was referring to saved men only. Yes the chapter is addressing born again belivers as you pointed out.

However, that verse is talking about unsaved men as well as saved men.

"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some MEN count slackness; but is long suffering to usward..."

WHO? MEN, Look at the context..look at the unsaved in verse 3 and verse 5. and then you have the saved in verse 11 and then saved and lost people in 17

Now wouldn't it be rather silly for a Calvinist to say that these are strictly SAVED people being talked about? " Not WILLING that ANY should PERISH" now is that the elect? according to Calvinsit doctrine the Elect couldn't perish if they tried.

and what do you say about Ch 2:1?

"But there were False prophets also among the people, even as there shall ( future tense) be false teachers among you,
dont we have false teachers today?
"who shall bring damnable heresies, EVEN DENYING THE LORD THAT BOUGHT THEM"

this verse clearly says Jesus bought "paid the price" for people who deny him..showing that Jesus died for lost people as well.

Hebrews 10:29

"Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall be thought worthy, WHO HATH TRODDEN UNDER FOOT THE SON OF GOD, and hath counted the BLOOD OF THE COVENANT, where with he was SANTIFIED,an unholy thing, and hathdone despite unto the Spirit of Grace.

Obviously this isnt talking about the elect is it? the elect wouldn't count the blood unholy would they? this is an unsaved man that the blood bought that rejected it. yet another proof in the Bible that Jesus died for all.

That lines up with John 3:16, John 1:29, 2nd timothy 2:3-6, Hebrews 2:9, and 1 John 2:2 and 2 Corinthians 5:14-15 not one word in any of those verses says that Jesus only died for a few, they say he died for ALL, EVERY MAN, THE WHOLE WORLD

a

 

Col 3:25

"But he that doeth wrong shall recieve for the wrong which HE hath done: and there is no respect of Persons"

If God only meant for a select few to be saved wouldn't you say he was showing respect towards those few that he chose? kind of goes against what scripture clearly says.

Romans ch 2:11

For there is NO RESPECT OF PERSONS with God

All under sin..all can be saved God did his part it's up to you to take it or leave it.

 

No, the respect would be if he chose some for a reason other than his sovereign will and grace. In your position, God would respect those who chose him while disrespecting those who reject him. Yet God is no respector of persons, therefore, he cannot save on any basis other than his own sovereign will.

 

"No, the respect would be if he chose some for a reason other than his sovereign will and grace. In your position, God would respect those who chose him while disrespecting those who reject him. Yet God is no respector of persons, therefore, he cannot save on any basis other than his own sovereign will."

Larry, your statement makes NO SENSE at all. none.

God told you he is no respecter of persons. fair is fair everyone is treated exactly the same. you are grabbing at staws.

I can't belive you actually said that God can't save on the Basis of his own sovereign will..

is not his will expressly explained in 2 peter 3:9? "not WILLING that ANY should perish"

OR 2 Timothy 2:3-4 "for this is good and acceptable in the sight of GOD our Saviour; who WILL have all men to be saved..."

that is his will right there Larry. It says so! I think the problem is that you can't understand why, if God wills all men to be saved that all men aren't if God is supposed to sovereign. you think that man can't change God's mind that is your problem. but GOD himself says in Jeremiah 18:8

" IF (there again is GOD giving an option) that nation,against whom I have pronounced, TURN from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them"

That can be said of nations and people. and please notice God doesn't force his will on anyone, he gives them a chance to repent. and obviously people or nations CAN chose their destiny.

that is why God is a just God.

 

It actually makes a lot of sense. You say that God saves people on the basis of their response to him. That means that he respects those who choose him while not respecting those who don't. How much more simple could it be put? Either God saves people on the basis of something in them or the basis of something in himself.

So what about the people who live in areas where the gospel has never been heard or preached, where there are no missionaries, no mass communication? Are they treatly exactly the same as those in America where we have all these things? Of course not. By your standard God is unfair to them because they were born in a communist bloc country, a thirdworld country of poverty, etc. where they will probably never the gospel. I have a Scriptural answer to that. You don't.

I can't believe you can't read. I said that God cannot save on any other basis than his sovereign will. You are the one who denies that God saves on the basis of his sovereign will.

Who is the any? There are 4 different explanations for this. Two of which are in agreement with you but not with the rest of Scripture.

So then why are all men saved? Is God's will not always accomplished? Can you thwart his will? When you answer consider Isaiah 46:9-10: "Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure'; "

It seems then that you are driven to this conclusion: Either 1) Isaiah 46:9-10 is not true or ) "will" in 2 Tim 2 does not mean what you think it does.

This is absolutely true. You keep quoting these like I will disagree. I won't. If they turned, then God would remove the curse.

I absolutely agree. They freely choose their own destiny. God does not force anyone to accept him.

Why don't you start with Isaiah 46:9-10 and start talking about some of these passages? Explain to us how you get around them.