Just "WHO" does Christ save?

[Earth Wind and Fire]

To whom is this addressed?

Anyone who can answer the question.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

That's not in line with numero uno. Sounds more like numero dos.

Well, kinda seems to me that He died for all..., but not all will accept. If one who was not otherwise going to accept..., does, then he's included under the all? :tonofbricks: Numero uno.

So why dont all accept?

 

[convicted1]

So why dont all accept?

They loved darkness rather than Light?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

They loved darkness rather than Light?

So would you call that, unbelief?

 

[freeatlast]

I think we have discussed this before but John Owen proposes 3 possible scenarios regarding the EXTENT of atonement:

1. Jesus died for the sins of ALL People.

2. Jesus died for the sins of some people.

3. Jesus died for "some sins" of all people.

Pick one and please explain your selection.

Actually it is none of those. He did not die for sins. He died for sin (singular).

The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

It is not about individuals and their sins. It is about sin. He paid the debt for sin, period. The one barrier that separates man from God is no more. Now who so ever may come as the price is already paid, but we have to choose to come.
Rev 22:17
And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

 

[HAMel]

So why dont all accept?

The million dollar question with eternal consequences.

We read in Psalm 14:1-3, "The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."

I suppose what the fool is really saying is that he does not want God.

...wow!!!

Our Lord speaks to all people.

 

[freeatlast]

So why dont all accept?

The million dollar question with eternal consequences.

We read in Psalm 14:1-3, "The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."

I suppose what the fool is really saying is that he does not want God.

...wow!!!

Our Lord speaks to all people.

Yes that is what is happening.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Actually it is none of those. He did not die for sins. He died for sin (singular).

The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

It is not about individuals and their sins. It is about sin. He paid the debt for sin, period. The one barrier that separates man from God is no more. Now who so ever may come as the price is already paid, but we have to choose to come.
Rev 22:17
And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

And so isnt "Unbelief" Sin....perhaps the greatest sin?

 

[freeatlast]

And so isnt "Unbelief" Sin....perhaps the greatest sin?

Un-belief is the only sin. It is just expressed in things like murder, adultery, lying, coveting, and so on. Keep in mind that un-belief does not mean we do not believe a certain thing. It means we do not accept it in application to ourselves. It is the willful rejection of what we know is true or right, or it could be said to have a burger king mentality. I want it my way.

 

[blackbird]

Jesus died for the whosoever wills

 

[glfredrick]

I dont want to put words in your mouth but since not all are going to come then I believe your answer is # 2 ....Jesus died for the Sins of Some people. Question then is, why dont they all come?

I would modify your statement, "All of the sins for "some" of the people."

 

[AresMan]

Actually it is none of those. He did not die for sins. He died for sin (singular).

Yes, but in dying for "sin" it is that He died substitutionally for the very sins of those who are saved.

1Pe 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

Read it carefully.

 

[HankD]

I think we have discussed this before but John Owen proposes 3 possible scenarios regarding the EXTENT of atonement:

1. Jesus died for the sins of ALL People.

2. Jesus died for the sins of some people.

3. Jesus died for "some sins" of all people.

Pick one and please explain your selection.

You missed one: John 3:16

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.​

and then another verse which says the same thing but in a different way.​

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.​

He is the Savior of all those in the world who will believe.

HankD​

 

[preacher4truth]

You missed one: John 3:16

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.​

and then another verse which says the same thing but in a different way.​

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.​

HankD​

"All men" qualified by "specially" (i.e. particularly, or specifically), who are of one kind, that is, those who believe, or His elect.

 

[freeatlast]

Yes, but in dying for "sin" it is that He died substitutionally for the very sins of those who are saved.

1Pe 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

Read it carefully.

That passage is not saying anything different then what John wrote. The translation is not correct. It should not say "sins" plural. There is nothing in the Greek to support the plural form. That is a an addition by the translators.

He himself bore our sin in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

 

[DaChaser1]

I think we have discussed this before but John Owen proposes 3 possible scenarios regarding the EXTENT of atonement:

1. Jesus died for the sins of ALL People.

2. Jesus died for the sins of some people.

3. Jesus died for "some sins" of all people.

Pick one and please explain your selection.

More like NONE of the above for me!

being a "4 point" DoG believer, would agree with John Calvin himself that while Jesus died for the Sins of whole world, in that His death did indeed have unlimited atonment in it in the sense that it was God dying, that this is effectually ONLY to them who are saved by it, the 'elect" of God!

 

[HankD]

That passage is not saying anything different then what John wrote. The translation is not correct. It should not say "sins" plural. There is nothing in the Greek to support the plural form. That is a an addition by the translators.

He himself bore our sin in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

FAL, what is your Greek source for 2 Peter 2:24?

The Scrivener TR, Majority Text as well as the Wescott and Hort Greek NT all have "sins" plural.


HankD

 

[jbh28]

Correction, It can't be sufficient if it's not intended for them.

Yes it can. Jesus' death on the cross was on infinite value therefore sufficient for all. Would you disagree so far? The death of Christ was intended to save believers. Would you disagree with that? Intention doesn't limit sufficiency.

 

[freeatlast]

FAL, what is your Greek source for 2 Peter 2:24?

The Scrivener TR, Majority Text as well as the Wescott and Hort Greek NT all have "sins" plural.


HankD

I am not saying some translators do not translate it that way. I said there is nothing in the Greek to support it. The Greek word "hamartia" is neutral and there is nothing in the text to modify the word to make it plural. If it said "He himself bore all of our" or "He himself bore our many" then it would be plural, but there is nothing in the text to support a plural translation except personal choice. If it is made plural there then what ever rule is used to do so has to be used in every other place including John. However if the passage in John is singular, and it is, then the same rule has to be used in Peter and that means it should be singular.

 

[freeatlast]

Yes it can. Jesus' death on the cross was on infinite value therefore sufficient for all.

Absolutely! What He did was not take away some sin or the sin of some people. He took away sin, period, and anyone who receives Him receives what He did.
1John 1:29
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.