God doesn't love the lost? Explain Mark 10:21

What man did Christ die for?

Didn't Christ die to atone for sin so that ALL men could have everlasting life through their faith in Jesus who is God the son? That is what scripture says.

 

The answer is quite simple. The word for 'love' in Mark 10:21 is 'agapao' and it is the SAME word used in Matt. 5:44 and Luke 6:27 for 'loving your enemies.' As an unbeliever, the rich young ruler was an enemy of God- but Christ still had love for him. That is your answer.

 

Ask him when you get to heaven. It certainly wasn't because he was a sinner or rejected Christ- for many have sinned and rejected Christ before they were saved. There is no knowable dividing line between those that accept and those that reject- only God knows.

 

please show me in scripture where Christ effectually took away the penalty for the sins of every person that ever lived or ever will live- and while you're at it, please explain how anyone can go to hell and be punished for sins Christ died for.

 

Ask him when you get to heaven. It certainly wasn't because he was a sinner or rejected Christ- for many have sinned and rejected Christ before they were saved. There is no knowable dividing line between those that accept and those that reject- only God knows. </font>[/QUOTE]No need to ask, because I know that He did die for him because His Word says He did. </font>[/QUOTE]If he died for you then he died for ALL MANKIND, because scriptures say that he died to atone for sin, and ALL MANKIND have sinned.

 

You've had that explained to you and quite clearly, but because you are calvinized, you refuse to believe it!

 

If by 'Calvinized' you mean 'scripturalized' I would agree with you.

 

If by 'Calvinized' you mean 'scripturalized' I would agree with you. </font>[/QUOTE]Whetstone, with that comment you are implying that Wes is unsaved. I'm glad not all of them do that. I've only been called a hell bound heretic by a small minority of them.

 

If by 'Calvinized' you mean 'scripturalized' I would agree with you. </font>[/QUOTE]"Calvinized" and "scripturalized" are not equals, Calvinized is a 'stripped-down' bare bones version of Scripturalized.

 

King James,
I did not see what you see in Whetstone's comment. Would you care to expound on how his comment says that I am unsaved?

 

Wes, I was on your side. Do you constantly go around trying to stir up strife??? If you can't see what I saw in that statement, that is your problem. I saw it. We are all different. Now...shush...

 

Seems to me you should apologize to Whetstone for a false accusation against him!

 

i concur with Wes (one of few times here mind you!)...where did I say wes was unsaved by my statement:

"If by 'Calvinized' you mean 'scripturalized' I would agree with you."

 

Ok...to say "scripturalized" means you appear to be implying that he does not know Scripture thereby he is not saved. You come across like you are all holy because you "know Scripture".
I mean...someone called me a hell bound heretic on here before because I "did not know Scripture" according to them.

If I am wrong, I apologize. Now...I better not see from you or anyone else little inunendos that I'm a hell bound heretic because I am not a Calvinist. Got it?

 

There, that clears the air, let's stroll down to the pub and down an ale, pat each other on the back and have a few laughs.

 

Actually...I am surprised I had to explain it. Two bright guys such as yourselves should have been able to see my point.

 

Your comments in this thread are a strong sign of immaturity.