Did Christ Die Only for the Elect

[Allan]

Actaully in looking at a latter post I think I did misunderstand you.
You are speaking of being chosen and not specifically what order salvation takes.

Am I right?

 

[ray Marshall]

Who has said God isn't sovereign? If God gives man free will to accept or reject Him doen't undermine His sovereignty one bit.

then are you saying: How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation?

 

[Allan]

then are you saying: How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation?

No, I think he is saying something more like this:

Hbr 3:15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation

 

[ray Marshall]

...and the burden of proof falls on you that regeneration precedes faith.

Yes, regeneration must come first. Faith is given to a quickened man. You can't put the cart in front of the horse.
Even as the FATHER quickeneth the dead, Si I will quichen whomsoever I will.
Eph: 2'1 And you hath he quicken why were dead in sin and ect.
If it were up to man, he will never come.
I am well satisfied with the way GOD does his work and have no problen whatsoever. He does whatever is pleasing in his sight. I would say if it was up to man, there would be a lot less saints in Heaven on the last day. in Romans and acts he does do it somewhat different, if I have the right book and chapters.

 

[ray Marshall]

No, I think he is saying something more like this:

Yes, but some have hardened their hearts. it was in the old testament, but help me if I am wrong.

 

[Allan]

Yes, but some have hardened their hearts. it was in the old testament, but help me if I am wrong.

Not sure I understand you. Hebrews is in the NT not OT. The passage was from the writter of Hebrews (I think it's Paul but who cares ) It is something stated in the the Book of Hebrews 4 times. Three in chapter 3 and 1 in chapter four. And Paul is speaking to those regarding salvation that are 'hearing' the Lord.

 

[ray Marshall]

If Christ called, they would hear. The dead analogy doesn't hold water, as we are also "dead" to sin...yet I sin. According to you, I should be a corpse to sin, unable to sin.

That is the point I have been trying to make: "If CHRIST calls for one, Nothing in the Earth or under the earth will be able to prevent him from coming.
Lets teach to the ones where ever they are to come and not make it to mean that if (a man in mature) isn't drawn unto him, that it is over for him as some preach in their churches.If he isn't drawned, it may be over for him but lets not preach universal salvation. It isn't our business, only GOD'S business. Maybe sometime between the now and the end of his life GOD will call him if it is his intent.

A lot of half text is used by some ministers because they cannot use the whole text and get by with what they use in calling to a universal salvationtheory.

 

[Allan]

Yes, regeneration must come first. Faith is given to a quickened man. You can't put the cart in front of the horse.
Even as the FATHER quickeneth the dead, Si I will quichen whomsoever I will.
Eph: 2'1 And you hath he quicken why were dead in sin and ect.
If it were up to man, he will never come.
I am well satisfied with the way GOD does his work and have no problen whatsoever. He does whatever is pleasing in his sight. I would say if it was up to man, there would be a lot less saints in Heaven on the last day. in Romans and acts he does do it somewhat different, if I have the right book and chapters.

Only regarding a 'logical order' and not a specific chronological order.
IOW - nothing in scripture establishes this view but this position is 'only' understood due to a theological construct and not so much scripture on the subject. The best scripture gives is that the events are either exactly or almost simultanious. Only two arguments can be made scripturally. They happen at the same time or that faith at the very moment it is excersized we have a person regenerate thus almost simultanious.

A logical order does not mean something is specifically stated but that it is something presumed from other views.

 

[Allan]

That is the point I have been trying to make: "If CHRIST calls for one, Nothing in the Earth or under the earth will be able to prevent him from coming.
Lets teach to the ones where ever they are to come and not make it to mean that if (a man in mature) isn't drawn unto him, that it is over for him as some preach in their churches.If he isn't drawned, it may be over for him but lets not preach universal salvation. It isn't our business, only GOD'S business. Maybe sometime between the now and the end of his life GOD will call him if it is his intent.

A lot of half text is used by some ministers because they cannot use the whole text and get by with what they use in calling to a universal salvationtheory.

Actaully we have in scripture people that God called and they refused (word pretty much just like that ). We also have people that 'hear' the Lord and (like in Hebrews 3) are implored not to harden their hearts.

Also, I know many pastors who have preached this whole passage without fail and to purpose of Christ being the propitiation for all men and not just us only.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Statements are used to make an attack, especially false ones like you made.

You are incorrect. There was not attack.

Yet that is exactly what the passage says.

Again, simply incorrect.

If we put well placed periods and question marks whenever and wherever we want to, we can make the Bible say whatever we want it to. It's one statement, not 3 as you have chopped it into.

Actually, the Bible was originally written with no punctuation. But is a common pedagogical method to break things down into pieces as I did to show the relationships between words.

In the end, Webdog, the text says what it says and you need to believe it.

You think choosing is because of sanctification and faith. Yet choosing was from the beginning or from the foundation of the world. But you didn't have faith at the beginning/foundation of the world. So to say what you are saying is to say that you were chosen because of something you didn't even have (especially since you didn't exist).

Before you pull out the "God's foreknowledge" argument, figure out why election was necessary if you were going to believe anyway.

It makes no sense.

So again, on this, the text does not support you. It just doesn't. You believe because you want to, not because the text says it.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I do agree on your point that 'chosen' is refering specifically for salvation. It is emphasizing the point that it was God's purpose from before creation to save them (those whom the text speaks).
However I believe you appear to make the assuption the text is refering to how a person brought to salvation instead of it being the operation of what saves. There are two little words that can not be overlooked with dealing with theology here - 'Through' as well as 'and'.

Again, man, simply read the verse and finish the sentence: God chose ______. When you use the Bible to finish that sentence, you will never come up with a method. It simply isn't there.

One can not be saved unless one is set apart unto God. - no question
One can not be saved unless one has believed. - no question.
Without both of these no one is saved for it is through both that salvation is established.

Except for your misunderstanding of sanctification you are exactly right. The verse says that salvation comes through setting apart and belief. It does not say that choosing comes through that.

So, sanctification can not be the 'effectual call' since we are sanctified by faith not prior to it.

You are failing to note that sanctification (hagiazo) does not always means spiritual growth after salvation. Study it out and you will see.

Have you changed your view on this. I know that you previously held faith preceded regeneration (IF I remember correctly)? Or do you consider sanctification and regeneration to seperate things?

No I have not changed my view. Yes, sanctification and regeneration are separate things. And there is more than one meaning to sanctification.

Again, my appeal is simply to the text of Scripture. I don't think we need all these gymnastics you guys are using. You are making it way too hard when the text is clear.

 

[OldRegular]

Who has said God isn't sovereign? If God gives man free will to accept or reject Him doen't undermine His sovereignty one bit.

The only man who was given free will was Adam and he chose rebellion rather than obedience and so man has ever since. I am sure that the following have been posted but you reading them once again won't hurt.

1Corinthians 2:14. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Ephesians 2.1-9 NKJV
1. And you (He made alive), who were dead in trespasses and sins,
2. in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience,
3. among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.
4. But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5. even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6. and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7. that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
9. not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Not that it will make any difference to you but please note that we were all dead and God, while we were dead, made us alive. Now Paul is not speaking about physical death and life but spiritual death and life. Also notice that this happened without any action whatsoever on man's part.

 

[Salamander]

I am currently indexing a forthcoming book entitled: Communities of Conviction: Baptist Beginnings in Europe. In the text when speaking of Particular Baptist the following statement is made:



Do you agree with the belief that Christ died only for the elect? If so, why? If not, why not?

Because the Bible says he died for all men so they might be saved/elect.

They only become elect through regeneration. They are not regenerated until Holy Ghost indwelling, not before. Only calvinists disagree with the last statement, although God does not.:thumbs:

 

[webdog]

The only man who was given free will was Adam and he chose rebellion rather than obedience and so man has ever since. I am sure that the following have been posted but you reading them once again won't hurt.

1Corinthians 2:14. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Ephesians 2.1-9 NKJV
1. And you (He made alive), who were dead in trespasses and sins,
2. in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience,
3. among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.
4. But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5. even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6. and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7. that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
9. not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Not that it will make any difference to you but please note that we were all dead and God, while we were dead, made us alive. Now Paul is not speaking about physical death and life but spiritual death and life. Also notice that this happened without any action whatsoever on man's part.

That text says nothing of pre-faith regeneration. Of course man is separated (dead) from God due to sin...that's not the point. Your view also has a true believer unable to sin (dead to sin). What is dead, then? Separation, plain and simple.

The text in 1 Corinthians (written to beleivers) is speaking of the old nature a believer still has, and this nature (not the new) cannot discern the things of God.

I can read them all day long, but they out of context still don't support your view today, just like they haven't for a hundred years.

 

[webdog]

You are incorrect. There was not attack

You said I don't listen to Scripture. That's a lie. It's a statement, and an attack. If I said you don't read the Bible, that would also be a statement, and an attack. You are incorrect.

Again, simply incorrect.

Again, simply incorrect (dude, we can do this all day for all I care )

Actually, the Bible was originally written with no punctuation. But is a common pedagogical method to break things down into pieces as I did to show the relationships between words.

Yet no translation has broken it down like you have. Wonder why? Probably because it is not meant to be.

In the end, Webdog, the text says what it says and you need to believe it.

I do, I don't believe it the way you state it should be believed.

You think choosing is because of sanctification and faith. Yet choosing was from the beginning or from the foundation of the world. But you didn't have faith at the beginning/foundation of the world. So to say what you are saying is to say that you were chosen because of something you didn't even have (especially since you didn't exist).

The choosing for salvation is because of the work of the Spirit and faith, yes I believe that because that is what the passage says. God chose from the beginning (before the foundation of the world) to save those of faith. This happens due to the work of the Spirit. This is elementary stuff, Larry.

Before you pull out the "God's foreknowledge" argument, figure out why election was necessary if you were going to believe anyway.

I wasn't going to bring it out, but regardless you did above.

so again, on this, the text does not support you. It just doesn't. You believe because you want to, not because the text says it.

so again, on this, the text does not support you. It just doesn't. You believe because you want to, not because the text says it.

 

[webdog]

From the People's New Testament:

Chosen you to salvation. In contrast with those who fall victims to the man of sin, the Thessalonian Christians had been chosen to life.
From the beginning. From the beginning God had determined on the salvation of the Gentiles, and arranged the plans by which they were saved. See notes on Romans, chapter 9, for a full discussion of this subject.
Through sanctification of the Spirit. This clause tells how God chose them to salvation. To this there are two sides, the human and the divine. On the human side they believed the truth. On the divine side, God sanctified them by the Spirit. He had chosen from the beginning all that believe and accept the truth.

 

[MB]

It seems to me that the question is: Who is sovereign in salvation, God or man?

If God is sovereign then Salvation from beginning to end is solely the work of God! As the writer of Hebrews [God] states:

Hebrews 12:1, 2
1. Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,
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.

If man is sovereign then there is no God!

Sovereign? Where do you see Sovereign in the passage above? For that matter where do you see the word any where in scripture? Man certainly isn't sovereign

 

[AresMan]

Do you agree with the belief that Christ died only for the elect? If so, why? If not, why not?

If you believe that believers and elect are one and the same, and you believe that Christ's atonement is efficient only for them, then what difference does it make? Especially for the non-universalist non-calvinists among us.

 

[Pastor Larry]

You said I don't listen to Scripture. That's a lie. It's a statement, and an attack. If I said you don't read the Bible, that would also be a statement, and an attack. You are incorrect.

It's not an attack and you saying it is won't make it so. Quit beating a dead horse. You were wrong. The fact is that you don't listen to Scripture. I don't think it is intentional. I think you mean well. But you come to Scripture with certain positions and are therefore unwilling to listen to what the text says. It's a problem.

Yet no translation has broken it down like you have. Wonder why?

You said it yourself. It is a translation. It is not an explanation.

Probably because it is not meant to be.

See above. Study what a translation is supposed to be.

I do, I don't believe it the way you state it should be believed.

No, you don't. The text says that you were chosen for salvation. It does not say a method was choosing.

God chose from the beginning (before the foundation of the world) to save those of faith.

But that's not what the text says. It doesn't say that God chose "to save those of faith." Read your Bible and see what the direct object of "choose" is. It isn't "those of faith." It is "you."

This is elementary stuff, Larry.

It really is. It is actually preelementary. Paul was writing this stuff to people who had been saved less than three months in 1 Thess 1. 2 Thess is a little later. But if those young and immature believers can handle it, one wonders why older ones can't.

so again, on this, the text does not support you. It just doesn't. You believe because you want to, not because the text says it.

This is plainly incorrect. Again, simply read the text. There are few things in Scripture as clear as this, particularly in this verse.

 

[zrs6v4]

Jesus died for all, but instead of some. The blood of the cross was sufficient for all, but efficient for the elect.

Cheers,

Jim

I think this is very well put. Yes it was for all. Not all have been atoned for. So b/c it was sufficient for all doesnt mean it was applied to all or it would be universalism. Therefore it was efficient for the "elect" who have and will be saved. According to the will of God.:thumbsup: