If you are a Five point Calvinist.

[Dave G]

All references teach He. died for all.

None of them, in context, teach that He died for all men, women and children that God has created.
Some are clear all by themselves as Matthew 1:21, John 10:11, and Isaiah 53:8 are, and others are arrived at through their context.

 

[agedman]

The New Testament is full of verses that teach Jesus came into the world to save sinners

But that isn’t what you posted.

Sometimes exuberance visits us all.

 

[Dave G]

The reformed/calvinistic see "Truth" their own way, which is not what the Bible says, especially on salvation.

On salvation I agree with the Reformed and "Calvinist" ( as you call them ), in the so-called "Five Points".
To me, they are correct in every "point".

Others disagree with this. so there are other ways to understand "Truth".

I agree.

There are other ways to understand how the Bible teaches things...
But only one is the truth.

There is only one faith, one baptism, one truth....there is no such thing as "orthodoxy", and there is no such thing as two Gospels with two contradictory messages.
Either God does all the work, or He does part of it... while we do "our part".

 

[37818]

None of them, in context, teach that He died for all.
Some are clear all by themselves as Matthew 1:21, John 10:11, and Isaiah 53:8 are, and others are arrived at through context.

1 Timothy 2:6, ". . . Who gave himself a ransom for all, . . .". So He will be either one's Savior or one's Judge. As it is written in Romans 8:34, ". . . Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, . . ." And Acts 10:42, ". . . he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead. . . ."

 

[agedman]

Because someone mentioned the name Lazarus, i thought it appropriate to remind folks that had our Lord not been specific in naming Lazarus, all the graves would have been opened with everyone coming forth.

 

[canadyjd]

Truth can be understood in more than one way

Truth can only be misunderstood in more than one way.

peace to you

 

[Dave G]

1 Timothy 2:6, ". . . Who gave himself a ransom for all, . . .". So He will be either one's Savior or one's Judge. As it is written in Romans 8:34, ". . . Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, . . ." And Acts 10:42, ". . . he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead. . . ."

I agree, in 1 Timothy 2:4-6, He gave Himself a ransom for "all"...
the same "every man" as described in Hebrews 2:9 and later developed in the verses after it:

In Hebrews 2:10 I see that it describes them as "sons" that He will bring with Him to glory.
In Hebrews 2:11they are known as "they who are sanctified" as well as "brethren".
In Hebrews 2:12 they are described as "brethren", as well as "the church".
In Hebrews 12:13 He tells us that they are "the children which God has given me" ( see John 6:37-39, John 6:64-65, John 17:2 ).
In Hebrews 2:14 further tells us that they are "the children", just as verse 13 did.
In Hebrews 2:15 they are the "them",
Hebrews 2:16 it tells us the Jesus took on the seed of Abraham ( men )..
In Hebrews 2:17 the "every man" are the "brethren", and that He made reconiliation for the sins of...not "everyone", but "the people"..His people, just as Matthew 1:21 and Isaiah 53:8 tell us.
Finally, in Hebrews 2:18 I see that those He tasted death for are the "them that are tempted".


Regarding Acts of the Apostles 10:42, I agree that He is indeed ordained of God to be the Judge of the quick ( alive, spiritually ) and the dead ( dead, spiritually ).

 

[37818]

Romans 8:34, ,". . . Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, .
. ."

". . . To what purpose serves the general ransom, but only to assert that Almighty God would have the precious blood of his dear Son poured out for innumerable souls whom he will not have to share in any drop thereof, and so, in respect of them, to be spilt in vain, or else to be shed for them only that they might be the deeper damned? . . .". -- John Owen

 

[37818]

My purpose for this thread is to hear from five point Calvinists how they came to believe Christ died for them. My difficulty is from the perspective with a general claim Christ died for everyone, no one can know Christ died for one's self if Christ did not die for all, with Romans 5:8 in mind, ". . . while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. . . ." Mere belief does not make what is believed true. So unless Christ's death for sinners is for all sinners is all sinners one cannot presume it includes one's self.

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

 

[1689Dave]

My purpose for this thread is to hear from five point Calvinists how they came to believe Christ died for them. My difficulty is from the perspective with a general claim Christ died for everyone, no one can know Christ died for one's self if Christ did not die for all, with Romans 5:8 in mind, ". . . while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. . . ." Mere belief does not make what is believed true. So unless Christ's death for sinners is for all sinners is all sinners one cannot presume it includes one's self.

In my case, I know Christ died for me because of the Spirit bearing witness with my spirit. I know that as sinful as I am left to my own strength I could not believe it unless He imparted the new birth first. The bible tells me so.

 

[Dave G]

Mere belief does not make what is believed true.

Mere belief can be described in more than one way.

For example, according to the Scriptures, it's not the belief of "ideas" or doctrines that is an indicator of whether or not someone is one of the Lord's people...
It's their belief of His words ( John 8:43-47 ) that is the evidence and what makes their situation true.

 

[Dave G]

My purpose for this thread is to hear from five point Calvinists how they came to believe Christ died for them. My difficulty is from the perspective with a general claim Christ died for everyone, no one can know Christ died for one's self if Christ did not die for all, with Romans 5:8 in mind, ". . . while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. . . ." Mere belief does not make what is believed true. So unless Christ's death for sinners is for all sinners is all sinners one cannot presume it includes one's self.

To me, the underlined seems to be circular reasoning.
I don't say that to be offensive, but to be objective.

For example,
When I first heard the word of God regarding my sin and the punishment for it, I believed the word of God.
When I first heard about Jesus being the way, the truth and the life, I believed the words.

When I first heard the word of God in Romans 5, I believed it and saw that it applied to me.
When I first heard that remission of sins is promised to those who believe on Christ, I believed that...
All at the age of 12 and thereafter.


The subject of who the Lord died for wasn't even on my mind as a very young believer...
I just knew that He died for me and that His blood was shed for me.

The rest came later...some of it much later as I came to study his words deeply and to understand them in their proper contexts.

In other words, I didn't believe a "systematic theology" to start with ( and I still don't )...
I believed basically 1 Corinthians 15:1-6 at the core, and the rest expanded outward from there.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

How did I find out Christ died only for me as a believer? I was in a 4 point Calvinist Church that taught universal atonement. Before that, I ran in Arminian circles. So I never knew about "Limited Atonement" until they began teaching against it. But in that setting, I heard the doctrine clearly stated for the first time in their effort to disprove it. It was as though nothing in the world made more sense to me than Limited Atonement. I reasoned with others that if Limited Atonement is true, then all that they teach about faith and salvation is false. That was when I dropped out of Church and began studying Reformed and early 1600s Baptist theology.

From there I challenged and got rid of everything I'd been taught in my Arminian, Pentecostal, and Dispensationalist's past.

Excellent…. You should study Sinclair Ferguson and then The Marrow of Modern Divinity

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

OK, I’m a Primitive Baptist not a Calvinist… in short we find references in scripture for each Doctrine of Grace point but we omit John Calvin and his teachings of infant baptism. That’s frankly Presbyterian or Dutch Reformed.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Zero times. Not even once

peace to you

Pay no attention as he is a blowhard… how many times have I….. I I I.

 

[37818]

Mere belief can be described in more than one way.

For example, according to the Scriptures, it's not the belief of "ideas" or doctrines that is an indicator of whether or not someone is one of the Lord's people...
It's their belief of His words ( John 8:43-47 ) that is the evidence and what makes their situation true.

Belief is fundamental to all knowledge. What is believed has to be true first. What is understood to be true is the basis of any belief.

On the premise all five points of the Calvinist view are true. My unbelief in those interpertations do not make these tenets false.
Now what is the consequence of not believing in solely a limited atonement? The benefite I see in believiing in a general atonement is there can be no doubt that Christ died for the one who is believing.

 

[37818]

I believed basically 1 Corinthians 15:1-6 at the core, and the rest expanded outward from there.

1 Corinthians 15:3, ". . . that Christ died for our sins . . . ." without qualification is a belief in a general redemption, aka as unlimited atonement.

 

[1689Dave]

Belief is fundamental to all knowledge. What is believed has to be true first. What is understood to be true is the basis of any belief.

On the premise all five points of the Calvinist view are true. My unbelief in those interpertations do not make these tenets false.
Now what is the consequence of not believing in solely a limited atonement? The benefite I see in believiing in a general atonement is there can be no doubt that Christ died for the one who is believing.

But Christ is an experience. And faith is evidence of salvation. I could not believe had Christ not died for me. So limited atonement assures me I'm among the elect. Because I could not discern Christ otherwise. If I save myself, I have nothing but myself to trust in, as is the case in universal atonement.

 

[AustinC]

1 Corinthians 15:3, ". . . that Christ died for our sins . . . ." without qualification is a belief in a general redemption, aka as unlimited atonement.

No...it is not a belief in general redemption, aka unlimited atonement.
"Our" is limited. This first creed is something only Christians can declare. The qualifier is "our", we who believe. The atonement is only effective to those who believe.

Is God so unorganized and general as to spill his blood so that much of his blood is wasted? Perhaps that is how some read the Bible and view the Creator. He just generally throws his blood on everything, but the power to make it effective is in the hands of man.
I do not see God ever acting in a way that He is not in full control at all times. Jesus (God) was certainly always in control of every encounter he had with an individual. Even his choice of Judas was purposeful.
I contend that one can easily argue limited atonement from the creed found in 1 Corinthians 3.

 

[Yeshua1]

No...it is not a belief in general redemption, aka unlimited atonement.
"Our" is limited. This first creed is something only Christians can declare. The qualifier is "our", we who believe. The atonement is only effective to those who believe.

Is God so unorganized and general as to spill his blood so that much of his blood is wasted? Perhaps that is how some read the Bible and view the Creator. He just generally throws his blood on everything, but the power to make it effective is in the hands of man.
I do not see God ever acting in a way that He is not in full control at all times. Jesus (God) was certainly always in control of every encounter he had with an individual. Even his choice of Judas was purposeful.
I contend that one can easily argue limited atonement from the creed found in 1 Corinthians 3.

Just cannot accept that the God who had set up such a plan of salvation as described to us in Romans 8 would in the final state of the salvation process have it u;ultimately rested upon and determined by our " fallen free will decisions"