Can The Case Be Made That Christ Died For All?

[Reformed1689]

The problem lies in the fact that it side tracks and divides evangelism. Most newly converted Calvinists spend far more time trying to convert Non Calls than they spend trying to convert Sinners.

I would say that you could say that for any "pet area" of theology though. Does that mean the church should not discuss it? No. It does mean, that we should also make sure we are focusing on other areas of need as well.

 

[Marooncat79]

The problem lies in the fact that it side tracks and divides evangelism. Most newly converted Calvinists spend far more time trying to convert Non Calls than they spend trying to convert Sinners.

I agrre

 

[AustinC]

I agrre

I disagree.
The impact of evangelism becomes more profound and important in obeying our Father when we know that our Father calls us to be the clarion call of the Good News while the Holy Spirit goes about bringing the elect who hear the good news to saving faith.

 

[Marooncat79]

I disagree.
The impact of evangelism becomes more profound and important in obeying our Father when we know that our Father calls us to be the clarion call of the Good News while the Holy Spirit goes about bringing the elect who hear the good news to saving faith.

I agree with that Austin

 

[kyredneck]

Most newly converted Calvinists spend far more time trying to convert Non Calls than they spend trying to convert Sinners.

I remember those days. Several non-Cal friends visited our church at my invite.

 

[Silverhair]

This is a continuation from post What is your definition of a Calvinist?

@Revmitchell

No, from those verses the case absolutely cannot be made if you stick to proper hermeneutical principles. Namely, context means things.

John 3:16 all that is stated is that Christ was given so that whoever believes will be saved. It in no way says he died for every person individually. You have to read that into the passage because of your theology.

2 Peter 3:9 we have beaten this like a dead horse. No, any does not and cannot mean all individuals without distinction based on the context and it is hermeneutical malpractice to say that it does. What is the antecedent of the any? It is "you." And who are the you? The beloved. That is not all individuals without distinction.

There is no amount of twisting you can do with that verse to make it say Christ died for every individual.

So I stick to my previous statement. Nowhere, and I mean nowhere, in the Scriptures does it suggest that Christ died for all individuals without distinction. What it does actually state is that he died for the sheep, he gave himself up for the church, he died for his people, he saves his people.

That is a specific people, the elect. The whoever will believe. That is who he died for.

So no, it is not dishonest to say the case cannot be made with those verses unless you are ok with some glaring errors in that case.

So if you carry your view through to it's logical conclusion then you must agree with the following statement.

In Calvinist theology (irresistible grace) regarding Jesus requires that:
The absolutely elect must have been saved without him;
and the non-elect cannot be saved by him.

 

[Silverhair]

When the High Priest offered the sacrifice of Atonement did it atone for the whole world or did it atone for all who were the chosen Israel of God?

When Jesus, the Lamb of God and the great High Priest offered himself as a sacrifice of Atonement did he atone for the whole world or did he atone for all who were chosen children of God?

The sacrifices of the old covenant were foreshadows of the new covenant sacrifice of Christ Jesus. If the atonement in the old covenant was particular to Israel, then the atonement of the new covenant is particular to the chosen children of God.

Think through what you just wrote. "Atonement did it atone for the whole world or did it atone for all who were the chosen Israel of God?" Israel as that was who it was intended for.

What does 1Jn 2:2 say. "He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." It does not say for a chosen group it clearly say for the whole world.

So I agree that the sacrifices of the old covenant were foreshadows of the new covenant sacrifice of Christ Jesus. The sacrifice, His blood, was for the whole world. You have to stop reading into the text what you want to see.

 

[Reformed1689]

So if you carry your view through to it's logical conclusion then you must agree with the following statement.

In Calvinist theology (irresistible grace) regarding Jesus requires that:
The absolutely elect must have been saved without him;
and the non-elect cannot be saved by him.

Nope

 

[AustinC]

Think through what you just wrote. "Atonement did it atone for the whole world or did it atone for all who were the chosen Israel of God?" Israel as that was who it was intended for.

What does 1Jn 2:2 say. "He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." It does not say for a chosen group it clearly say for the whole world.

So I agree that the sacrifices of the old covenant were foreshadows of the new covenant sacrifice of Christ Jesus. The sacrifice, His blood, was for the whole world. You have to stop reading into the text what you want to see.

The atonement is particular and 1 John 2:2 is declaring that this particular atonement will be for people all around the whole world. How can I say this? Because all of scripture clarifies this verse. But, I will simply share this section from Revelation 7:9-12.

After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!” And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, saying, “Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever! Amen.”

Therefore, the foreshadowing is for the particular, chosen, elect, people of God.

If, your view was correct, then all humanity has been saved, is saved, and will be saved. Your declaration is universalism and you cannot twist out of it, if you use only 1 John 2:2. So, either own your universalism or admit that scripture interprets scripture and therefore the atonement is limited to those God has chosen to save.

Now, if you hate the fact that God chose you, then you need to deal with that between you and God, because God chose you, no matter how much you hate that fact (how can anyone hate the fact that the God of creation chose to save them out of their wretchedness).

 

[Van]

Here we have yet another thread pushing the false screed of Calvinism, this time that Christ did not die for all of fallen humanity.

Thus ransom for all does not refer to God's desire that all people be saved. Nope, rather it means what Calvinism falsely claims, that Christ died only for the previously chosen elect. See 1 Timothy 2:4-6

Next let us consider this verse:

2Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance.​

Here we get the idiotic argument that you (the saved beloved) are being addressed in the "not willing for any to perish" as if those saved might perish if God ends the age too soon. I kid you not. God is patient to allow time for His chosen people to engage as His ambassadors with the ministry of reconciliation, thus more time allows more of the lost to be saved. So simple even a child could understand.

And of course, Calvinists falsely claims when John uses the term translated as "world" he is not referring to fallen mankind. But anyone can see in 1 John 5:19 John does indeed use the tern translated as world to refer to fallen humanity.

I could go on and on, but the Calvinists will just ignore truth and post more false claims...

 

[tyndale1946]

The atonement is particular and 1 John 2:2 is declaring that this particular atonement will be for people all around the whole world. How can I say this? Because all of scripture clarifies this verse. But, I will simply share this section from Revelation 7:9-12.

After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!” And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, saying, “Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever! Amen.”

Therefore, the foreshadowing is for the particular, chosen, elect, people of God.

If, your view was correct, then all humanity has been saved, is saved, and will be saved. Your declaration is universalism and you cannot twist out of it, if you use only 1 John 2:2. So, either own your universalism or admit that scripture interprets scripture and therefore the atonement is limited to those God has chosen to save.

Now, if you hate the fact that God chose you, then you need to deal with that between you and God, because God chose you, no matter how much you hate that fact (how can anyone hate the fact that the God of creation chose to save them out of their wretchedness).

I agree... Christ died for ALL!... His children!... Brother Glen

John 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

 

[Silverhair]

Nope

Still not able to refute these post are you. Te duck and weave seems to be standard response from you.

 

[37818]

Christ died for more than His elect, per Matthew 20:28, ". . . Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. . . ." Matthew 22:14, ". . . For many are called, but few are chosen. . . ."

 

[Silverhair]

The atonement is particular and 1 John 2:2 is declaring that this particular atonement will be for people all around the whole world. How can I say this? Because all of scripture clarifies this verse. But, I will simply share this section from Revelation 7:9-12.

After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!” And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, saying, “Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever! Amen.”

Therefore, the foreshadowing is for the particular, chosen, elect, people of God.

If, your view was correct, then all humanity has been saved, is saved, and will be saved. Your declaration is universalism and you cannot twist out of it, if you use only 1 John 2:2. So, either own your universalism or admit that scripture interprets scripture and therefore the atonement is limited to those God has chosen to save.

Now, if you hate the fact that God chose you, then you need to deal with that between you and God, because God chose you, no matter how much you hate that fact (how can anyone hate the fact that the God of creation chose to save them out of their wretchedness).

Strange how you think "from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages" does not mean the whole world. But then again you have to read whole world as "elect" or your theology falls apart.

Perhaps you have heard of this guy. D A Carson {calvinist} says "there's no place in the scripture where the word world means the elect, that there's just no place at all where this happens." He disagrees with your view. But I am sure you will not allow that to alter your fantastic verse twisting.

I find it strange that you would say that 1Jn 2:2 teaches universalism. Are you now claiming everyone will be saved. But the bible would disagree with your view.

Perhaps you should read these verses. They should help you get your theology straight.
1Jn 4:10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
1Jn 4:14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world.
Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell,
Col 1:20 and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.
Joh 3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

Now I would not want you to think I am advocating for universalism.
Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom 10:13 For "WHOEVER CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED."
Eph 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,

Now I realize that you will reject all these because they do not fit with your theology. But you are not disagreeing with me you are disagreeing with the bible.

 

[Silverhair]

I agree... Christ died for ALL!... His children!... Brother Glen

John 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

So if you want to take that stand then you have to agree that God has condemned billions to hell with no hope of salvation. If you say they are there because of their sin that would be wrong. Why you ask, it is because all are sinners and your version of God only decided to save a select group and condemned the rest when He actually could have made all of them willing to trust in Him. So the fact He did not makes Him responsible not the man.

But, and this is the best part, God did make a way for anyone to be saved.
Joh 6:40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

Isn't that great, God is not responsible for those in hell, only those that freely reject the son are condemned.
Joh 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

God is great and He desires all to come to repentance and He has made a way for anyone to do so. Faith in His son.

 

[Reformed1689]

Still not able to refute these post are you. Te duck and weave seems to be standard response from you.

There was nothing to refute. You, as usual, just put forth arguments nobody is making.

 

[37818]

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. . . .".

 

[Reformed1689]

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. . . .".

sigh.... we have been over this, we already know in these events that when Jesus says "you" he is not giving the promise to everyone present, namely Judas.

 

[AustinC]

So if you want to take that stand then you have to agree that God has condemned billions to hell with no hope of salvation.

...because God is just.

If you say they are there because of their sin that would be wrong.

Apparently the verse "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" is something you have never read.

Why you ask, it is because all are sinners and your version of God only decided to save a select group and condemned the rest when He actually could have made all of them willing to trust in Him. So the fact He did not makes Him responsible not the man.

Your argument here is utter rubbish and twisted logic. You are attempting to force God to do what you demand He do. This shows me that you place yourself in a position higher than God and thus make yourself Sovereign and God your servant.

But, and this is the best part, God did make a way for anyone to be saved.

Here you are forcing your philosophy of free will with no biblical support.

Joh 6:40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

As usual you fail to quote the whole.

John 6:40-44
For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

Isn't that great, God is not responsible for those in hell, only those that freely reject the son are condemned.

Here you assert your philosophy and again place yourself as sovereign while God becomes your underling.

Joh 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

John 3 is so good. Jesus tells us that we must be born again (Peter, in 1 Peter 1, tells us that only God can rebirth us) and defines belief.
What is not expressed in this passage is your philosophy of free will. You simply project your philosophy onto the verse.

God is great and He desires all to come to repentance and He has made a way for anyone to do so. Faith in His son.

Notice your contradiction and how you make God to be less than man.
1) God desires all to come to repentance
2) Humans can thwart God's desire
3) Human generated faith determines God's response. (Man causes, God reacts as an effect).

Your man-centeredness is obvious to all readers. The discerning Christian will see how you glory in humanity and condemn God if He doesn't follow your assertions.

 

[Reformed1689]

...because God is just.


Apparently the verse "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" is something you have never read.


Your argument here is utter rubbish and twisted logic. You are attempting to force God to do what you demand He do. This shows me that you place yourself in a position higher than God and thus make yourself Sovereign and God your servant.


Here you are forcing your philosophy of free will with no biblical support.


As usual you fail to quote the whole.

John 6:40-44
For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.


Here you assert your philosophy and again place yourself as sovereign while God becomes your underling.


John 3 is so good. Jesus tells us that we must be born again (Peter, in 1 Peter 1, tells us that only God can rebirth us) and defines belief.
What is not expressed in this passage is your philosophy of free will. You simply project your philosophy onto the verse.


Notice your contradiction and how you make God to be less than man.
1) God desires all to come to repentance
2) Humans can thwart God's desire
3) Human generated faith determines God's response. (Man causes, God reacts as an effect).

Your man-centeredness is obvious to all readers. The discerning Christian will see how you glory in humanity and condemn God if He doesn't follow your assertions.

Some people would just say he is a humanist.