Can The Case Be Made That Christ Died For All?

[Reformed1689]

Then you reject scripture.

No, because no Scripture says Christ paid for the sins of every individual. And if he did, then there is a justice problem isn't there?

 

[Revmitchell]

Friend, you and I see these passages differently.

As a Calvinist, I happily confess that there is an outward call of the Gospel. As an example, when a Gospel message is preached, all within hearing range are under the outward call of the Gospel. However, only those appointed unto eternal life believe (Acts 13:48).

And reformed folks get the context wrong just as they do with John 15:16. In the acts passage with issue of the day was were Gentiles also appointed to receive salvation just as the Jews were. The Jews believed that only they were appointed to salvation. In Acts 13 many Gentiles came to the faith. It is being pointed out that Gentiles also are grafted in to be saved. Trying to make this passage about individualistic salvation is incorrect.

 

[Silverhair]

Election is not based upon who Joe, John, Jane, Jimmy, Jose, Juanita, are or what they do. It’s based solely upon Him…So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.[Romans 9:18 NASB]

If they believe then He saves,{free will} not before they believe as calvinists would have. {no free will}

 

[Silverhair]

What question? The one where you ask me to defend something I don't believe?

So you don't believe the DoG? So what do you believe because you seem to deny the bible.

 

[Silverhair]

No, because no Scripture says Christ paid for the sins of every individual. And if he did, then there is a justice problem isn't there?

Then you just misread the bible text. But as always you claim your calvinist view has to be correct because you say it is. Trust scripture not your misreading of it.

 

[Revmitchell]

No, because no Scripture says Christ paid for the sins of every individual. And if he did, then there is a justice problem isn't there?

Why is there a justice problem?

 

[AustinC]

Friend, you and I see these passages differently.

As a Calvinist, I happily confess that there is an outward call of the Gospel. As an example, when a Gospel message is preached, all within hearing range are under the outward call of the Gospel. However, only those appointed unto eternal life believe (Acts 13:48).

John Piper, in a sermon on 1 Peter chapter one, uses the raising of Lazarus from the dead as his illustration.
Jesus was the cause agent of Lazarus being brought to life. Jesus spoke and commanded "Lazarus come forth." This is the action of God.
The effect of that command is that Lazarus physically got up and walked out of that tomb. Lazarus did not make himself alive, but he sure did walk out of that tomb. God caused. Lazarus walked. Cause and effect.

When the word of God is preached, Jesus calls to particular persons in the audience and they are brought to life by that personal command of Christ. The effect is that they walk out of their death, into newness of life in Christ Jesus.

 

[AustinC]

Did not say that God was obligated but I did say He is just. But you do not deal with His justice. As is usual you make a number of strawman comments that you feel you can defeat.

Does God desire that all be saved, YES. Has He provided the way for man to be saved, YES. Has He placed a condition on how one may access that salvation, YES.

But under your calvinist theology the offer of salvation is moot. According to calvinism He has picked out a select group to be saved and the rest have no chance to be saved. It is not their sin that prevents them it is the calvinist god that does that.

Calvinism has made the gospel of no value. Christ Jesus did not have to go to the cross for the calvinist as they were already picked out and according to calvinist whatever He has decreed will surely happen. Remember that according to calcinism God has decreed unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass.

Only those that are included in the Unconditional Election will partake of the Limited Atonement and will be drawn to God by His Irresistible Grace. So all men do not have an equal chance to know or trust in God. The calvinist theology precludes this, but they just do not want to acknowledge that fact.

So because of calvinist theology
The absolutely elect must have been saved without Christ Jesus;
and the non-elect cannot be saved by him.

The bible is very clear that God makes a bona fide offer of salvation to all people everywhere (Joh_3:16-18; Joh_3:36; Joh_5:24; Joh_12:32; Rom_10:9, Rom_10:13). Anyone can be saved by repenting of his sins and believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, if a person is lost, it is because he chooses to be lost, not because God desires it.

You treat Jesus as if he were a car salesman. "Step right up folks, I have a deal for you. All ya gotta do is follow these steps and ya get yourself some eternal life!!! Now, which one of ya's are gonna take me up on this great deal?"

Silverhair, any discerning person can see your soteriology is all messed up and is a veiled humanism in disguise.

 

[Reformed1689]

If they believe then He saves,{free will} not before they believe as calvinists would have. {no free will}

And the strawman argument continues. Why do you think we preach they are saved before they believe? I know that is the hyper-cal point of view, but not the overal Calvinist point of view.

 

[Reformed1689]

Why is there a justice problem?

If the debt has been paid, yet the payment is still required, that is not justice.

 

[Reformed1689]

Then you just misread the bible text. But as always you claim your calvinist view has to be correct because you say it is. Trust scripture not your misreading of it.

So you are ok with people having their debt paid, then the debt being required a second time?

 

[Reformed1689]

So you don't believe the DoG? So what do you believe because you seem to deny the bible.

I do believe the DoG. But that is not what you are arguing against.

 

[Reformed1689]

Silverhair, any discerning person can see your soteriology is all messed up and is a veiled humanism in disguise.

I wouldn't even say it is veiled.

 

[37818]

I cannot find a definition for general redemption anywhere, except for a law journal on stocks and bonds.
Here's one definition of redemption:
Redemption means to secure the release or recovery of persons or things by the payment of a price. It is a covenantal legal term closely associated with ransom, atonement, substitution, and deliverance, thus salvation. Theologically, redemption refers ultimately to the saving work of Christ, who came to accomplish our redemption by giving his life in substitution for our own as the ransom price.

In this definition, where do you see a general work of God on behalf of every human ever created?

Was the price only partially paid and then the human had to act before the rest of the price was paid? Is the secured release contingent upon human actions, but withdrawn if humans don't act?

How is redemption 100% of God if that person ultimately isn't redeemed?
Do you have a working definition of General Redemption, because I cannot find one.

Redemption - The Gospel Coalition

Try John Owen's "The Death of Death in the Death of Christ." A standard work against any general redemption by the atonement of Christ.

 

[37818]

Let me ask you this, when you say "general redemption" what do you mean? If, by that, you mean all have been bought and paid for, then I 100% reject that as heresy.

I consider it's rejection making it impossible for any lost person to know Christ died for any lost persons.

 

[AustinC]

Try John Owen's "The Death of Death in the Death of Christ." A standard work against any general redemption by the atonement of Christ.

Let's try the Bible, a standard work where either general redemption is expressed or it isn't expressed.
Where is the idea that men are" generally" redeemed found in the Bible?

 

[Silverhair]

And the strawman argument continues. Why do you think we preach they are saved before they believe? I know that is the hyper-cal point of view, but not the overal Calvinist point of view.

Then you will have yo change what you say and hold to as that is what is main stream calvinism.

 

[Silverhair]

So you are ok with people having their debt paid, then the debt being required a second time?

They have the option of receiving the free gift unlike your theology where it is thrust upon like it or not.

 

[Silverhair]

I do believe the DoG. But that is not what you are arguing against.

Then you did not read the post.

 

[Silverhair]

I wouldn't even say it is veiled.

Right, I do not veil the fact that calvinism is a errant theology.