1 Peter 3:18 says Christ died for all

cygnusx1 · Jan 27, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Yet, nearly ALL of them indicate that Jesus died for everyone, every one, every single individual,etc.

How come this question was ignored?

btw, please explain this verse and it's scope, as you understand it:

Matt 18:11 - For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.

In your explanation, please include who all is "lost". Thanks.

Look , you have just jumped from everyone to "every single individual" etc

There is no need to stretch it or add to scripture , the context is sons .

Are the elect lost ? Then they needed saving .

If Christ came to save every person then the message of the Gospel must reach every sinner , it doesn't.

FreeGrace2 · Jan 27, 2014

cygnusx1 said:
Look , you have just jumped from everyone to "every single individual" etc

Seriously? Didn't read the 45 translations I provided, apparently. Which, btw, came from actual Greek language experts.

There is no need to stretch it or add to scripture , the context is sons .

From v.10 on, yes. New paragraph. The real context for understanding "pas" comes from the 3 uses in v.8, which is a quote from Psa 8, and the understanding is clearly universal.

Are the elect lost ? Then they needed saving .

Jesus said He came to save that which was lost in Matt 18:11. How do you get the "elect" from that statement? Quite a leap, I'd say.
But your response does demonstrate the bias of Calvinists who come to verses that don't support their theology.

Paul was clear about who all have sinned: everyone (Rom 3:10, 23). And he was clear about the result of sin; death (Rom 6:23). It should be obvious that everyone is lost.

Yet, your focus is on ONLY the elect that are lost.

Are you suggesting that the non-elect are not lost as well? Seems so. So it can be concluded from your response that all will be saved, since the non-elect are not lost. That's universalism, which is heresy.

If Christ came to save every person then the message of the Gospel must reach every sinner , it doesn't.

Click to expand...

So? It is available to those who actually do seek God, because He promised that those who seek Him will be found by Him.

But, your real problem is your response to Matt 18:11. All are lost, and seems RT doesn't want to face that, in light of Matt 18:11.

Click to expand...

cygnusx1 · Jan 27, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Seriously? Didn't read the 45 translations I provided, apparently. Which, btw, came from actual Greek language experts.

From v.10 on, yes. New paragraph. The real context for understanding "pas" comes from the 3 uses in v.8, which is a quote from Psa 8, and the understanding is clearly universal.

Are the elect lost ? Then they needed saving .
Jesus said He came to save that which was lost in Matt 18:11. How do you get the "elect" from that statement? Quite a leap, I'd say.
But your response does demonstrate the bias of Calvinists who come to verses that don't support their theology.

Paul was clear about who all have sinned: everyone (Rom 3:10, 23). And he was clear about the result of sin; death (Rom 6:23). It should be obvious that everyone is lost.

Yet, your focus is on ONLY the elect that are lost.

Are you suggesting that the non-elect are not lost as well? Seems so. So it can be concluded from your response that all will be saved, since the non-elect are not lost. That's universalism, which is heresy.

So? It is available to those who actually do seek God, because He promised that those who seek Him will be found by Him.

But, your real problem is your response to Matt 18:11. All are lost, and seems RT doesn't want to face that, in light of Matt 18:11.

I see so only those who spend the time and effort seeking God get the Gospel !

The very idea is not dissimila to the heresy "salvation by works" .

Yet scripture speaks of none seeking God (Romans. 3)

Furthermore scripture underlies this fact by stating God was found by those NOT seeking Him.

Now that sounds far more like what it is , "salvation by Grace "

Many are called but few are chosen , but you are reading into Christ coming to save that which was lost , you are looking for a number , a limit or even no limit , stretching the passage again .

sdowney717 · Jan 27, 2014

cygnusx1 said:
I see so only those who spend the time and effort seeking God get the Gospel !

The very idea is not dissimila to the heresy "salvation by works" .

Yet scripture speaks of none seeking God (Romans. 3)

Furthermore scripture underlies this fact by stating God was found by those NOT seeking Him.

Now that sounds far more like what it is , "salvation by Grace "

Many are called but few are chosen , but you are reading into Christ coming to save that which was lost , you are looking for a number , a limit or even no limit , stretching the passage again .

Yes God says this is what happens.

20 But Isaiah is very bold and says:

“I was found by those who did not seek Me;
I was made manifest to those who did not ask for Me.”[m]

When in Acts 17, it says in the hope they might seek and find God, well that just does not happen with men.

26 And He has made from one blood[c] every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, 27 so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.’

It is simply God holding that all are without excuse before Him. God makes situations such that man might seek God, but they don't unless God convicts by the Holy Spirit of Truth.

Romans 1

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

Man is without excuse, even if no one ever told them anything of the Gospel.
Man left to himself without grace to be saved results in the condemnation of Romans 1 and their only destiny is wrath.
God evens tells us that God has shown to man God's eternal nature and power, but they dont seek for God.

FreeGrace2 · Jan 27, 2014

cygnusx1 said:
I see so only those who spend the time and effort seeking God get the Gospel !

Apparently, you do not see. Everyone who does seek God will be found by Him.

The very idea is not dissimila to the heresy "salvation by works" .

Please take that idea up with God. His promises stand.

Yet scripture speaks of none seeking God (Romans. 3)

Yes, rip the context right out of the text. Rom 3:10 is a quote (it is written) from Psa 14:1-3, and the subject is atheists. It is they who do not seek God.

Furthermore scripture underlies this fact by stating God was found by those NOT seeking Him.

Yes, in reference to the Gentiles, IN CONSTRAST to the Jews who tried to seek God through works. "salvation by works", as you put it.

Paul said it this way: 30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone

Now that sounds far more like what it is , "salvation by Grace "

Many are called but few are chosen

RT believes that all who are "called" are also "chosen". So RT has a problem with Matt 22:14.

but you are reading into Christ coming to save that which was losT , you are looking for a number , a limit or even no limit , stretching the passage again .

Quite the opposite, actually. The verse says nothing about limit. That's what the RT does; trying to force a limit on the "all" of Heb 2:9.

Matt 18:11 says Christ came to save the lost. How many of the 'lost'? Since it just says "lost", there is no reason to assume it is less than ALL of the lost.

If ol' Matt had just said "some of the lost", you'd probably have a point. But as it is, you have none.

Jesus came to save the lost. And ALL are lost.

Or, can you prove that only the elect are lost and need saving?

Epiphoskei · Jan 27, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Anyone with a lexicon knows that. The actual word is "pantos", from "pas", which means "all".

Here is how real Greek language experts understood the writer of Hebrews re: 2:9 -

Greek language experts who translate Bibles tend to be careful to translate words in the manner least likely to force an exegetical dispute one way or another. Pas is rendered in many passages as "everyone" because it acts as a substantive syntactically, and "everyone" is the generic substantive rendering of "every." This translation is chosen due to constraints of syntax, not constraints of meaning.

Context sometimes refines our translations if it can be demonstrated that a substantive has a more specific referent in the text. For instance, if I said in Greek something to the effect of "My son brought home a lot of pineapples and we ate every," clearly we wouldn't render this "we ate everyone" but "we ate every pineapple." Likewise, if we are reading a passage referring to the saints, we would take "every" to mean "every saint."

Translational philosophy basically prohibits that kind of use of context if there's a serious dispute over the meaning of a passage. There is a dispute over whether the passages we're examining mean every human being without exception, every kind of human being, every elect human being, etc., etc. Therefore the translators of most of the translations listed have defaulted to the generic translation for a substantive, which is semantically permissive of all manner of different kinds of readings, as the context permits. They punted. They didn't take a stand on the issue. But you're making it out to seem that the most undefined and permissive translation of a substantive is actually an endorsement of your highly defined and restricted interpretation.

sdowney717 · Jan 27, 2014

The Parable of the Lost Sheep

10 “Take heed that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that in heaven their angels always see the face of My Father who is in heaven. 11 For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.[a]

12 “What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them goes astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine and go to the mountains to seek the one that is straying? 13 And if he should find it, assuredly, I say to you, he rejoices more over that sheep than over the ninety-nine that did not go astray. 14 Even so it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish.

Definition of Lost Sheep please?
Who are the Lost sheep!
The lost here that Jesus is speaking of are the Lost sheep that Caiaphas prophesies in this way.

49 And one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, 50 nor do you consider that it is expedient for us[e] that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish.” 51 Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad.

The children scattered abroad are the lost sheep Jesus is speaking of.
They are those of the 'and I have other sheep not of this fold' lost sheep.
John 10

14 I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. 15 As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.

Sheep get saved, goats, wolves, serpents, dont.

sdowney717 · Jan 27, 2014

Peter should know a thing about the sheep and he does!

notice v 25, Peter says you were like lost sheep gone astray and now you have returned to Christ.

Peter is talking about the lost sheep, the same ones Jesus talked of.
The fact that Peter tells us we have returned has some meaning. Meaning we were lost, if something was lost it once was owned. Jesus came to seek and return that which was lost. The lost sheep. The ones who were in the loins before they were born and God foreknew them as His own. And God was determined that none of these lost sheep would remain lost, but that all would be recovered.

20 For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God. 21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps:

22 Who committed no sin,
Nor was deceit found in His mouth;
23 who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; 24 who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousnessby whose stripes you were healed.

25 For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.

FreeGrace2 · Jan 27, 2014

Epiphoskei said:
Greek language experts who translate Bibles tend to be careful to translate words in the manner least likely to force an exegetical dispute one way or another. Pas is rendered in many passages as "everyone" because it acts as a substantive syntactically, and "everyone" is the generic substantive rendering of "every." This translation is chosen due to constraints of syntax, not constraints of meaning.

Are your credentials such that your comments are fair of what actual real Greek language experts did when translating?

The reason they are careful to translate words is because they wanted to get it right. btw, it is only the Calvinists who take Heb 2:9 and "force an exegetical dispute one way or another". Because of the pre-conceived bias that Jesus DIDN'T die for everyone.

Context sometimes refines our translations if it can be demonstrated that a substantive has a more specific referent in the text. For instance, if I said in Greek something to the effect of "My son brought home a lot of pineapples and we ate every," clearly we wouldn't render this "we ate everyone" but "we ate every pineapple." Likewise, if we are reading a passage referring to the saints, we would take "every" to mean "every saint."[/QUOTE}
Whoa! There is a huge difference between your example and Heb 2:9. The writer didn't get to "many sons" until v.10. In your example, the subject of what was eaten was mentioned along with "pas", so obviously the "every" refers to pineapples, and not people.

But your argument is silly. In v.8 the writer spoke of the fact that God put man in charge of "pas", noted 3 times. v.8 quoted from Psa 8, which was about "sheep, oxen, beasts, birds and fish". Would anyone think that Jesus would taste death for any of these? No, of course not. Absurd.

So when the writer noted that Jesus tasted death for "pas", the only preconceived idea is that Jesus died for PEOPLE, not animals, birds or fish. So the "every" as you would have it, refers to people. He died for every people.

To limit His death to the "many sons" is absurd as well.

do you really want to argue that the writer was saying that Jesus tasted death for every many sons? Or "all the elect"? That's NOT how RT says it.

They always say that Christ died ONLY for thye elect; never ALL of the elect.

But that's basically what you're arguing here. It doesn't fly.

But you're making it out to seem that the most undefined and permissive translation of a substantive is actually an endorsement of your highly defined and restricted interpretation.

Click to expand...

Excuse me, but I'm not the one who's trying to force a "highly defined and RESTRICTED interpretation" on the verse. That would be RT all the way.

How does comprehending "all" as everyone create a "highly defined and restricted interpretation?

otoh, RT does exactly that by forcing "all" to mean "only the elect", basically.

cygnusx1 · Jan 27, 2014

sdowney717 said:
Yes God says this is what happens.

When in Acts 17, it says in the hope they might seek and find God, well that just does not happen with men.

It is simply God holding that all are without excuse before Him. God makes situations such that man might seek God, but they don't unless God convicts by the Holy Spirit of Truth.

Romans 1

Man is without excuse, even if no one ever told them anything of the Gospel.
Man left to himself without grace to be saved results in the condemnation of Romans 1 and their only destiny is wrath.
God evens tells us that God has shown to man God's eternal nature and power, but they dont seek for God.

Good post !!!

Gods Promises tell us nothing about men's ability only that God is gracious in the face of sin and rebellion .

Epiphoskei · Jan 27, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Are your credentials such that your comments are fair of what actual real Greek language experts did when translating?

Yes. Anyone with a semester of Greek would read "everyone" as a substantival adjective.

FreeGrace2 · Jan 27, 2014

cygnusx1 said:
Gods Promises tell us nothing about men's ability only that God is gracious in the face of sin and rebellion .

Actually, God's promises prove that man is able to respond to His promises.

If man wasn't, God's promises would be worthless at best!

In Mark 7:25-30, Jesus is asked to heal a woman's daughter. He told her He was here for Jews, not Gentiles. Note v.29 - And He said to her, “Because of this answer go; the demon has gone out of your daughter.”

He liked her answer and attitude, and healed her daughter because of it.

Did Jesus respond to the woman, or the other way around?

FreeGrace2 · Jan 27, 2014

Epiphoskei said:
Yes. Anyone with a semester of Greek would read "everyone" as a substantival adjective.

"Yes"? I asked if you had the credentials of the translators of the 45 translations. So, are you suggesting that the translators of the 45 translations I shared with you had less than a semester of Greek???

It is clear from their translations that they understood the writer to have said that Jesus died for everyone. Not "died for every". That means nothing.

shturt678s · Jan 27, 2014

sdowney717 said:
Yes God says this is what happens.

When in Acts 17, it says in the hope they might seek and find God, well that just does not happen with men.

It is simply God holding that all are without excuse before Him. God makes situations such that man might seek God, but they don't unless God convicts by the Holy Spirit of Truth.

Romans 1

Man is without excuse, even if no one ever told them anything of the Gospel.
Man left to himself without grace to be saved results in the condemnation of Romans 1 and their only destiny is wrath.
God evens tells us that God has shown to man God's eternal nature and power, but they dont seek for God.

Rom.1:20 & Acts17:24-29 deal only with "natural theology, and again not what men or aborted infants do with this "theology".

Old Jack that does appreciate you and your words.

Epiphoskei · Jan 27, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
"Yes"? I asked if you had the credentials of the translators of the 45 translations.

No, you asked if I was credentialed enough to know what the translators did when translated. They rendered the substantival as "everyone," because, as you say, "'died for every' [...] means nothing" in English. "Everyone" is the generic form of the substantival pas in English. It was chosen for syntactic, not semantic reasons.

FreeGrace2 said:
So, are you suggesting that the translators of the 45 translations I shared with you had less than a semester of Greek???

I'm suggesting that I and these translators are in agreement, and anyone with a semester of Greek can recognize it.

nobdysfool · Jan 27, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Actually, God's promises prove that man is able to respond to His promises.

That is the essence of Pelagianism. Pelagius was very upset when he heard Augustine pray "Lord, command what Thou Wilt, and grant what Thou commandest." Pelagius believed in natural ability, as do you, apparently. Augustine believed (rightly) that man cannot obey God unless God enables him to do so.

If man wasn't, God's promises would be worthless at best!

Or, it could be that God makes those promises, knowing that Man cannot attain them, so that Man will seek Him.

In Mark 7:25-30, Jesus is asked to heal a woman's daughter. He told her He was here for Jews, not Gentiles. Note v.29 - And He said to her, “Because of this answer go; the demon has gone out of your daughter.”

She responded in true faith. God responds to faith.

He liked her answer and attitude, and healed her daughter because of it.

What moved Him was her faith. He healed her daughter, not because of what she said and her attitude, but because she believed Him, that He could and would do what she asked.

Did Jesus respond to the woman, or the other way around?

He responded to her faith, which came about because of what she had heard about Him. (faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God)

FreeGrace2 · Jan 28, 2014

Epiphoskei said:
No, you asked if I was credentialed enough to know what the translators did when translated. They rendered the substantival as "everyone," because, as you say, "'died for every' [...] means nothing" in English. "Everyone" is the generic form of the substantival pas in English. It was chosen for syntactic, not semantic reasons.

They rendered it "everyone" because that's how they understood it. If they thought the writer was "hinting" at what followed, they would have made that clear. Apparently you didn't review all the ways various translations rendered it. None of which "fit" your view of "every son".

I'm suggesting that I and these translators are in agreement, and anyone with a semester of Greek can recognize it.

No, only those who come to Heb 2:9 with the pre-conceived notion that Christ didn't die for everyone would have to look around to find something to hang their theology on.

To claim that "pantos" in v.9 refers forward to "many sons" simply makes no sense, unless one demands that Christ didn't die for everyone.

FreeGrace2 · Jan 28, 2014

nobdysfool said:
That is the essence of Pelagianism. Pelagius was very upset when he heard Augustine pray "Lord, command what Thou Wilt, and grant what Thou commandest." Pelagius believed in natural ability, as do you, apparently. Augustine believed (rightly) that man cannot obey God unless God enables him to do so.

I couldn't care less about what anyone says. My concern is only what Scripture says. The FACT that God makes promises proves that man is able to believe those promises. Otherwise the promises are worthless and meaningless. Is that your position?

Or, it could be that God makes those promises, knowing that Man cannot attain them, so that Man will seek Him.

No. God makes promises and keeps His promises.

Hammster · Jan 28, 2014

Nothing impossible has been commanded by God. Why do we indulge in pointless evasions, advancing the frailty of our own nature as an objection to the one who commands us? No one knows better the true measure of our strength than He who has given it to us nor does anyone understand better how much we are able to do than He who has given us this very capacity of ours to be able; nor has He who is just wished to command anything impossible or He who is good intended to condemn a man for doing what he could not avoid doing.

FreeGrace2 · Jan 28, 2014

Hammster said:
Nothing impossible has been commanded by God.

Thank you for agreeing with my point. If it is impossible for man to understand and believe God's promises, His promises are rendered useless and meaningless. Which they aren't.

1 Peter 3:18 says Christ died for all

Jacob the twister.....

Senior Veteran

Jacob the twister.....

Newbie

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Newbie

Newbie

Senior Veteran

Jacob the twister.....

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

The original! Accept no substitutes!

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Psalm 144:1

Senior Veteran

Similar threads