Did Christ Die Only for the Elect

[ray Marshall]

three different times in the books of the Bible, GOD said that Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated. Three different times should be a good testimony.
When the apostiles (?) ask Jesus about Judas, he told them that that wasn't any concern to them. Judas was of the Devil in the choosing the twelve to follow him. I think Judas was chosen for the work of betraying our savior.

Even so the Father raises the dead and quickeneth them, I quickeneth whomsoevcer I will. May not be word for word but................................
Has not the potter the power over the clay to make one of good and the other be shaped as he will.

Has not the potter control over the clay, to make one of honor and another of dishonor?

 

[Pastor Larry]

As for the word "might", it was God's will for ALL to be saved

So do you believe that God's will can be thwarted?

It's true that no one can come to God unless the Holy Spirit draws them, but we're told in John 12:32, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth (crucified), will draw all men unto me." "All" not just some.

But isn't that referring to all kinds of men, as in men from all nations? Remember the context is about Greeks wanting to see Jesus, and Jesus refusing them for the moment.

 

[ray Marshall]

As for the word "might", it was God's will for ALL to be saved, and He provided a way for all to be saved. However, He also knew that not all would be saved. It's true that no one can come to God unless the Holy Spirit draws them, but we're told in John 12:32, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth (crucified), will draw all men unto me." "All" not just some.

Some take that to mean that everyone will be saved, but all it means is that He died for all and offers His forgiveness to all. So no one has the excuse that God rejected them or didn't die for them.

The only way I believe in "limited atonement" is that it is limited to those who believe since God will not save unrepentant sinners. His atonement is limited to those who come to Him for forgiveness.

Well, well ,still dancing around the very truth of the Bible.

 

[mparkerfd20]

The other versions you have quoted from takes away the true words of the KJV and makes it a muddy mess. I once looked in a bible of the Jehovah Witness and the shortest verse in the Bible is, "JESUS wept," made perfect sense, but in their Bible the verse read, "JESUS gave away to tears." Mighty confusing meaning. Did it mean that JESUS just gave into Mary, the sister on Lazereth because she was crying?

I agree in principle on the point you are making that God is sovereign and does as He pleases. I also agree wholeheartedly with the fact that he loved Jacob and hated Esau. EVEN BEFORE THEY WERE BORN.

I still concede that you have misunderstood the passage in Hebrews 12 to be talking about spiritual repentance, however, when it is not. REGARDLESS of the version used.

 

[webdog]

So do you believe that God's will can be thwarted?

Since He wills that all come to repentance, and some don't, what do you think? God permits sin, yet it is not His will that we sin, correct? Are we thwarting God's will when we sin?

 

[ray Marshall]

Jacob and Esau came from the same womb. Just what makes the difference that GOD chose to love Esau.

Correction, GOD chose to love Jacob and not Esau.

 

[ray Marshall]

Yes, but it doesn't stress spiritual repentance. He tried to change his mind and get his inheritance back.

He tried, why wasn't he successful?

 

[thegospelgeek]

He tried, why wasn't he successful?

Biblically no one knows, but I think it was because of the same reason that Cain's sacrifice wasn't accepted. Lack of faith.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Since He wills that all come to repentance, and some don't, what do you think? God permits sin, yet it is not His will that we sin, correct? Are we thwarting God's will when we sin?

Exactly. That is why theologians describe two wills of God, his moral will and his decreed will.

 

[Marcia]

I sure hope this is not the passage being referenced:

John 21:20-24
Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

Thanks, Jerome!

Not sure how this is being used by the person who first referenced this to support his view. I guess I've forgotten his point by now.

 

[Salamander]

Sal,

I'm a little confused here. Are you saying Yes Chist died for only the elect, or that he died for all?

All can be saved as in they might all be saved, but some rather remain in darkness.

 

[Pastor Larry]

He tried, why wasn't he successful?

REad your Bible. It tells you in Genesis 27.

The blessing had been given to Jacob already through deceit, and there was only one primary blessing. Esau received a secondary blessing. Thus, he could not get the birthright back or the blessing. A deal was a deal.

The Bible never tells us what Esau spiritually repented (or that he did not). You don't seek for spiritual repentance and then fail to find it. The point of HEbrews 12 is that Esau made evil choices and no amount of tears could change those choices.

 

[Marcia]

He tried, why wasn't he successful?

Maybe because he was repentant about giving away his birthright, but not repentant because he was disobedient or deceptive. We know his repentance was insufficient or superficial, otherwise, God would not have said what He did about Esau.

 

[Salamander]

Has not the potter control over the clay, to make one of honor and another of dishonor?

It is not "of", the preposition is "to", as they are led. One being led by the Spirit is TO honour, the other is led by the flesh TO dishonour. Follow the context and remove the preconceptions of calvinism and you'll know what the Scripture really means.

 

[Salamander]

So do you believe that God's will can be thwarted?

Do you believe all things are according to the will of God? Like, say, abortion?

But isn't that referring to all kinds of men, as in men from all nations? Remember the context is about Greeks wanting to see Jesus, and Jesus refusing them for the moment.

He came unto His own and they received him not. Jesus was first sent to Israel and as the prophecy was fulfilled, he turned from them unto the strangers.

 

[Salamander]

Exactly. That is why theologians describe two wills of God, his moral will and his decreed will.

And those theologians pit God against himself by advocating he has two opposing wills.:sleep:

 

[Jim1999]

Quote: And those theologians pit God against himself by advocating he has two opposing wills.
--------------------------------------

Where do you get two opposing wills? Everything happens under the absolute sovereignty of God. Then we fit man under that one will,,,in a human classification we call His permissive will, but still under His sovereign will.........He says thus far and no further, as demonstrated with Jonah,,remember Jonah? How else can one explain Jonah operating in disobedience to God yet under God. Eventually God reined Jonah into obedience.

The opposing view has man with an absolutely free will and this renders God helpless. There you have two wills. Fits in well with the big bang theory of evolution. God created the universe and then let it progess on its own.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Jonah]

Keyword is the Elect

> (‘Particular’ because in their view Christ died only for the elect)

What they believed as who the elect were is beyond me. However throughout the Bible the word translated into elect is "bachiyr" in Hebrew and "ekloge" or "eklektos" in the Greek. It simply is a word meaning chosen which is vary similar in Greek, "eklegomai".
It is apparent that the "elect" is something of a metaphor theologists have latched onto creating nearly a religion around.
I invite you to read the parable of the houseman hiring workers in Matthew 20 and the parable of the wedding Matthew 22. Both passages refer to the Master who chose few and called to others. It is a beautiful reflection of the Jews' rejection that permitted the grafting in of the Gentiles. And the grafting in of the Jews again at the end times.
In John 6:70 Jesus chose the twelve. John the Baptist was chosen as well as being prophetic fulfillment.

However to answer your question outright:
1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2 And He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
John 3:17-18 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Do you believe all things are according to the will of God? Like, say, abortion?

His decreed will, yes. All things are not according to God's moral will.

He came unto His own and they received him not. Jesus was first sent to Israel and as the prophecy was fulfilled, he turned from them unto the strangers.

That is irrelevant here.

And those theologians pit God against himself by advocating he has two opposing wills.

Not at all. God's moral will teaches that murder is wrong. God's decreed will was that his son be murdered.

 

[Jonah]

REad your Bible. It tells you in Genesis 27.

The blessing had been given to Jacob already through deceit, and there was only one primary blessing. Esau received a secondary blessing. Thus, he could not get the birthright back or the blessing. A deal was a deal.

The Bible never tells us what Esau spiritually repented (or that he did not). You don't seek for spiritual repentance and then fail to find it. The point of HEbrews 12 is that Esau made evil choices and no amount of tears could change those choices.

In all reality if sticking your hand out first constitutes being born, then you could say Esau was first born. Otherwise, the whole issue of Esau being rightful birthright heir is moot.