The Atonement: Which is The Bible's Teaching?

[MennoSota]

No ill will on this end either, brother. Like you I affirm the 5 points, which means I believe Jesus purposed to save only those who would believe. I also understand the John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2 views.

I do not disagree that those who are saved are only those God draws, those who He predestined (I believe predestined implies those who will not believe as well). But I do not believe it necessary to deny that salvation was made available to all men as a legitimate offer.

This is interesting to me because we are so closely aligned in our conclusions yet we differ in how we get here. I also held your view at one time, but I never really considered the 1 Timothy passage (I don't know how I would have reconciled the verse back then).

1. How do you interpret God as "the Savior of all men, especially believers"?

2. Since you state that you once affirmed both limited atonement and a universal provision (classic Calvinism) what passages made you abandon the latter?

Thanks, BTW, for your feedback. I've read your posts on several threads and appreciate your views and willingness to engage.

I would agree with John Piper in regard to 1 Timothy 4:10. Truth be told, my journey into a Reformed understanding of the Bible started when I went to Bethlehem Baptist and sat in a Sunday School class taught by Tom Shreiner. (Piper happened to be the pastor.) He challenged me with the scripture. Here is what Piper says.
We do not deny that Christ died to save all in some sense. Paul says in 1 Timothy 4:10 that in Christ God is “the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.” What we deny is that the death of Christ is for all men in the same sense. God sent Christ to save all in some sense. And he sent Christ to save those who believe in a more particular sense. God’s intention is different for each.

What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism | Desiring God

 

[JonC]

I would agree with John Piper in regard to 1 Timothy 4:10. Truth be told, my journey into a Reformed understanding of the Bible started when I went to Bethlehem Baptist and sat in a Sunday School class taught by Tom Shreiner. (Piper happened to be the pastor.) He challenged me with the scripture. Here is what Piper says.
We do not deny that Christ died to save all in some sense. Paul says in 1 Timothy 4:10 that in Christ God is “the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.” What we deny is that the death of Christ is for all men in the same sense. God sent Christ to save all in some sense. And he sent Christ to save those who believe in a more particular sense. God’s intention is different for each.

What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism | Desiring God

I like Piper's explanation. It is exactly what I mean when I say that Jesus died so that all may be saved but also that those who believed would be saved.

Christ's death was a genuine offer to all mankind and no one has the excuse (to use Billy Idol) of "Jesus died for somebody's sins but not mine". But at the same time the Atonement was purposed to effect the salvation of those who would believe (those whom the Father gave, the sheep). All could be saved, but none of their own accord (apart from God's intervention) will come. But there are a people called by God, chosen by God, and predestined by God to be a people of God. And they will come because the coming is directly related to the drawing. It is a work of God.

 

[Revmitchell]

I like Piper's explanation. It is exactly what I mean when I say that Jesus died so that all may be saved but also that those who believed would be saved.

Christ's death was a genuine offer to all mankind and no one has the excuse (to use Billy Idol) of "Jesus died for somebody's sins but not mine". But at the same time the Atonement was purposed to effect the salvation of those who would believe (those whom the Father gave, the sheep). All could be saved, but none of their own accord (apart from God's intervention) will come. But there are a people called by God, chosen by God, and predestined by God to be a people of God. And they will come because the coming is directly related to the drawing. It is a work of God.

My position is we become elect after we believe. Election is corporate not individual. God determined that all who believe would become the sons of God. We do not believe because we are elect. We believe because God saw to it the gospel was presented to us. That is the grace offered to everyone. We may receive that grace or decline it. That is the plan of God.

 

[JonC]

My position is we become elect after we believe. Election is corporate not individual. God determined that all who believe would become the sons of God. We do not believe because we are elect. We believe because God saw to it the gospel was presented to us. That is the grace offered to everyone. We may receive that grace or decline it. That is the plan of God.

Very often Scripture speaks of election as corporate (e.g., "the elect") and to my knowledge there is not an instance where an unbeliever is described as "elect" or "chosen" (within the context of salvation). I That said, I do believe that Romans 8:29 illustrates an individual election: "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren".

As the state of "election" is not applied to an unbeliever (while in lost state) I don't see this as a point that would (or should) divide. I think that you don't go far enough with this doctrine, but I also see that there are some who go too far (those who refer to people in this life as "sheep" or "goats" regardless of belief, approaching the heresy of Daniel Parker and his "serpent seed" doctrine).

 

[MennoSota]

I like Piper's explanation. It is exactly what I mean when I say that Jesus died so that all may be saved but also that those who believed would be saved.

Christ's death was a genuine offer to all mankind and no one has the excuse (to use Billy Idol) of "Jesus died for somebody's sins but not mine". But at the same time the Atonement was purposed to effect the salvation of those who would believe (those whom the Father gave, the sheep). All could be saved, but none of their own accord (apart from God's intervention) will come. But there are a people called by God, chosen by God, and predestined by God to be a people of God. And they will come because the coming is directly related to the drawing. It is a work of God.

Thanks for talking this out, Jon. It is good to be challenged and to clarify our views. Iron sharpens iron.

 

[Yeshua1]

For context, please - What verse are you speaking of?

Isaiah 53 describes the suffering messiah, and that was fully in the mode of a penal substitionary view of the Atonement!

 

[Yeshua1]

I think the issue is whether or not he can defend his version of Calvinism via Scripture. As it stands, I suspect that neither of you can without a good helping of "logical conclusions" and subjective reasoning. Scripture has not changed from "the old days". The information that we have now is the work of others as they develop theories to determine just what and how God thinks and acts beyond what Scripture has revealed.

To clarify, there are more views than one within orthodox Christianity and we would be fools to think otherwise. The view that God punished Jesus with the individual punishments due the individual sins of the elect is not the orthodox position (it is, in fact, a historically minority view and not without serious issues).

So the challenge remains - provide Scripture to explain the context by which God's wrath was pored out on Jesus (I'm not saying it wasn't, but I am saying it warrants going to God's Word for the answer).

The wrath of God is expressed as being in an active way towards sinners in the scriptures, and since Jesus took our place and died in our stead, why would he not experience it in the same way we would if atoning for our own sins?

 

[Yeshua1]

Sorry if I was not clear. No, I am not promoting universal salvation. I am, however, saying that we engage in the work of the Kingdom because we have fixed our hope on God who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.

What I am saying is that Jesus died as a propitiation for the sins of mankind (for the whole world). Salvation has come to all men in that there is a legitimate offer of salvation to everyone. The problem with some people's "Calvinism" is that they deny this truth and only acknowledge that Christ died to save those who would believe.

1 Timothy 4:10 For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.

God intended the death of jesus to provide justification for just the Elect of God in Christ.

 

[Yeshua1]

Well, I guess the first thing we need to make clear is that those are Paul’s words in 1 Timothy (to include the qualifier) and not my own. Jesus is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe. I could claim this because this is what Scripture says, and even if I couldn't fathom the statement and the need for qualification I could accept it because it is God's Word. It is not dependent on my understanding. Here, however, I believe the statement is very clear. Jesus Christ is the Savior of all men, especially those who believe. But since it is Scripture and not my own words, all I can do is offer commentary.

The Atonement (here I mean Christ's death, burial and resurrection) not only secured the salvation of those who would believe (God loved the world by sending His Son that all who believed would have life) but also constituted a legitimate offer of salvation to all mankind (Christ is the propitiation for our sins, not only ours but the sins of the whole world).

But hos death did not purchase salvation for all sinners....

 

[JonC]

Isaiah 53 describes the suffering messiah, and that was fully in the mode of a penal substitution view of the Atonement!

Isaiah 53 was also "fully in the mode" of the Substitution Theory as well (not to mention the Christus Victor motif and the other's along the way).

In the context of Isaiah 53, yes, I believe that those who viewed Christ's arrest all the way through the cross esteemed Him as smitten of God and afflicted. BUT he was pierced for their/our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities. The chastising for our well-being fell upon Him and by His scourging we are healed.

 

[Yeshua1]

No ill will on this end either, brother. Like you I affirm the 5 points, which means I believe Jesus purposed to save only those who would believe. I also understand the John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2 views.

I do not disagree that those who are saved are only those God draws, those who He predestined (I believe predestined implies those who will not believe as well). But I do not believe it necessary to deny that salvation was made available to all men as a legitimate offer.

This is interesting to me because we are so closely aligned in our conclusions yet we differ in how we get here. I also held your view at one time, but I never really considered the 1 Timothy passage (I don't know how I would have reconciled the verse back then).

1. How do you interpret God as "the Savior of all men, especially believers"?

2. Since you state that you once affirmed both limited atonement and a universal provision (classic Calvinism) what passages made you abandon the latter?

Thanks, BTW, for your feedback. I've read your posts on several threads and appreciate your views and willingness to engage.

I think that we would all affirm that Jesus died to secure salvation a just the elect, and that God commands us to also offer the Gospel to all sinners, its just that you at itmes seem to be shying away from the wrath of God and also making it seem that all sinners have same hope of getting saved.

 

[JonC]

But hos death did not purchase salvation for all sinners....

Again, for context, please point me to the passage you are referring to. It's easier for me to reply as I can see more fully where you are reading.

Thanks.

 

[Yeshua1]

Isaiah 53 was also "fully in the mode" of the Substitution Theory as well (not to mention the Christus Victor motif and the other's along the way).

In the context of Isaiah 53, yes, I believe that those who viewed Christ's arrest all the way through the cross esteemed Him as smitten of God and afflicted. BUT he was pierced for their/our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities. The chastising for our well-being fell upon Him and by His scourging we are healed.

Jesus identified with sinners so much, that to the father, he became like one of us under his divine wrath!

 

[JonC]

I think that we would all affirm that Jesus died to secure salvation a just the elect, and that God commands us to also offer the Gospel to all sinners, its just that you at itmes seem to be shying away from the wrath of God and also making it seem that all sinners have same hope of getting saved.

All sinners do have the same hope of getting saved. None, however, will turn to that Hope. God draws a people to Himself.

 

[Yeshua1]

All sinners do have the same hope of getting saved. None, however, will turn to that Hope. God draws a people to Himself.

How can all sinners have a real hope of getting saved, when the atonement was not for all sinners though?

 

[Yeshua1]

Again, for context, please point me to the passage you are referring to. It's easier for me to reply as I can see more fully where you are reading.

Thanks.

Hebrews 9:28 Esv
so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

 

[JonC]

Hebrews 9:28 Esv
so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

I don't see how this relates to your question. Jesus bore the sins of many and he will appear a second time - not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for Him. Jesus' death was a propitiation for our sins, not only ours but for the sins of the whole world (and using "world" within the context of 2 John, John Calvin was right that it means all mankind without exception). All mankind can be saved because of Jesus' work on the Cross - no exceptions. But only those who believe will be saved based on Jesus' work on the cross.

 

[JonC]

How can all sinners have a real hope of getting saved, when the atonement was not for all sinners though?

Because the work of the Cross was for all sinners (for all mankind). You affirm a great truth, brother, that Jesus died so that those who would believe in Him would have life, and ONLY those who believe in Him will be saved (there is no other way). That said, you deny another truth, that God is the Savior of all men. I believe you are restricted by your theology, but I do understand where you are coming from.

 

[Yeshua1]

I don't see how this relates to your question. Jesus bore the sins of many and he will appear a second time - not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for Him. Jesus' death was a propitiation for our sins, not only ours but for the sins of the whole world (and using "world" within the context of 2 John, John Calvin was right that it means all mankind without exception). All mankind can be saved because of Jesus' work on the Cross - no exceptions. But only those who believe will be saved based on Jesus' work on the cross.

The death of jesus was sufficient to allow God to save all sinners, but he intended it to only save some sinners, as this passage refers to His death fior the many, and not for the all!

 

[JonC]

The death of jesus was sufficient to allow God to save all sinners, but he intended it to only save some sinners, as this passage refers to His death fior the many, and not for the all!

Yes. And sufficiency implies that it could have saved those sinners (if it were not meant as a legitimate means that they could be saved then it would have been insufficient for their salvation). Salvation is to all men a legitimate offer and all men could be saved if they would believe. But they can't because they won't. And we wouldn't either, except that God worked in our hearts in such a way that we believe.