• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

"'All' means 'All'": Catch phrase or deep truth?

Discussion in 'Non-denominational' started by ThatOneGuy, Dec 6, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ThatOneGuy

    ThatOneGuy New Member

    Who wants to throw verses and interpretations back and forth about "limited" atonement and universal redemtion?

    Being the passive type that I am, it is an effort to force myself to first put forth an opinion or question, but here goes...

    What are the logical and scriptural grounds for universal redemption?


    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Andrew

    Andrew Well-Known Member

    Well if you believe in universal condemnation then you should also believe in universal redemption.

    IOW if you believe all men have fallen short of the glory of God becos of sin, then you should believe Christ shed his blood for all men, ie the forgiveness of God is offered to all men.

    Paul sums it up here (Rom 5) pretty nicely:

    12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

    if you interpret "all" here as all -- becos you belive all have sinned -- then why interpret "all" differently in the other verses here when it talks abt redemption for all men? why the inconsistency?

    18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon ALL men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon ALL men unto justification of life.

    I've had limited atonement believers tell me that the first ALL in the above means "all" (becos they believe that all have sinned), but in the same breath, they tell me that the second ALL in the same verse means "some"? Now, where is the consistency in interpretation?
  3. SavedByGrace3

    SavedByGrace3 Whoever calls on the name of Jesus will be saved Supporter

    United States
    I understand this to mean that just as all were condemned by the one man Adam, so to all have been reconciled by the one man Jesus. We have all been reconciled. All sins have been washed away. Not everyone is going to accept this.
  4. Andrew

    Andrew Well-Known Member

    The other thing that does not make sense to me abt Calvin's Limited Atonement is this:

    If Jesus redemption is not offered to all becos His blood was not shed for all men, how can there be people who reject the Christ?

    I mean how can one be accused and punished in hell for rejecting Christ when salvation was not even offered to them (the so-called non-elect) in the first place (becos Jesus did not die for them)? How can you be accused of rejecting X when X is not even offered to you???

    Finally, as I mentioned elsewhere, how can Christ's work be a much more than Adam if Adam's sin effects all men, but Jesus' work covers only some? That wld make Adam's work greater and more powerful in reach.
  5. Reformationist

    Reformationist Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

    United States
    For those who don't seem to understand what this doctrine purports, I'll explain it.

    Limited atonement means that Christ, in dying, intended to accomplish what He did accomplish: to take away the sins of God's elect, and to ensure that they would all be brought to faith through regeneration and preserved through faith for glory.  Christ did not intend to die in this efficacious sense for everyone.  The proof of that, as Scripture and experience unite to teach us, is that not all are saved. 

    In disscussing the atonement, some say that Christ died for all, and that all without exception will be saved.  This is an actual universalism.  A second doctrine, which most here adhere to, is that Christ died for all, but that His death has no saving effect without an added faith and repentance not foreseen in His death.  In other words, He died for the general purpose of making salvation possible, but the salvation of particular individuals was not included in His death.  This is hypothetical universalism.  The third doctrine is that although Christ's death was infinite in value, it was offered to save only some, those who were known beforehand.  This is the limited or definite atonement.

    Scripture does not teach that all will be saved, ruling out actual universalism.  The other two views do not differ about how many will be saved, but about the purpose for which Christ died.  Scripture addresses this question.  The New Testament teaches that God chose for salvation a great number of the fallen race and sent Christ into the world to save them:

    John 6:37-40
    All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.  For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.  This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.  And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

    If all were given, Christ would not make a distinction between who was and was not given to Him.

    John 10:27-29
    My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.  And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand.  My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand.

    If all were Christ's sheep then He would not make a distinction between His sheep and those that are not.

    John 11:51,52
    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, and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad.

    Right here the Word says that Jesus died "for the nation" which included those children of God scattered abroad.  If Christ died for all men then there would not be a distinction made here between who He died for and who He didn't.

    Romans 8:28-30
    And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.  For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.  Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

    Obviously God knows everyone.  So, "foreknew" cannot mean "to know ahead of time."  This deals with the intimate foreknowledge of God wherein He decreed, before the foundations of the world, the salvation of "whom He would call" to be confomed.  This passage, I believe, above all others clearly makes a distinction between those whom God predestined to be conformed to righteousness, and those He did not.

    Ephesians 1:3-14
    Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.
    In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace which He made to abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence, having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself, that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth--in Him.  In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.
    In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

    Too much proof to get into.  However, this passage makes it clear to any who are willing to see the Truth of God's sovereign design for mankind.

    1 Peter 1:20,21
    He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.

    This entire epistle is written to encourage persecuted and bewildered CHRISTIANS and to exhort them to stand fast in their faith.  Peter clearly points out for whom God did manifest the work of Christ on the cross.  Only by His grace are we able to put our hope in Him and trust that His work was effective in reconciling those that are, and will be, in Him to the Father.

    God bless
  6. Andrew

    Andrew Well-Known Member


    All the verses you gave do not prove that the work of the cross was only done for some. IOW that he shed 'just enough' blood for the elect, or took on only the sins of the elect.

    They simply prove predestination, which I believe. also you did not address the simple verse i posted.

    18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon ALL men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon ALL men unto justification of life.

    how do you treat the "all"s here? with consistency?

    and what abt simple clear-cut scriptures like John 3:16

    God so loved the world (didnt say elect) ....that whosoever (didnt say select few either)

    or what abt the verse that says Jesus came to save sinners. well who are sinners? all mankind or only the elect? are there 2 classes of sinners? -- sinner-elect and sinner-non-elect, the latter being left out in the plan of God?

    or Ac 2:21* And it shall come to pass, that whosoever (only the elect?) shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

    the answers are simple and obvious. I shall leave it at that :)
  7. Reformationist

    Reformationist Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

    United States
    Of course they don't.  What could I have been thinking? :rolleyes:

    Every time I hear this espoused as a view of the unversality of God's redemptive work it gets more ridiculous.  Do you even know what "justified" means?  It means to be pronounced just.  Have all men been pronounced just?  Of course not.

    I'll simply tell you to look up the various accepted definitions of the Greek word for world.  Also, if "world" means every person who ever lived, and ever will live (even though world is used something like 9 different ways in the Bible) then what you are contending is that God, the sovereign Ruler of all things created loves people that He ends up sending to hell.  Even if you believe that they get there because of a choice they make, you are saying that God, THE Judge, sends His loved ones to everlasting torment.  And what about the "clear-cut Scriptures" that say that God hates certain people?

    Uh...hello?  Are all sinners saved?  Please tell me you don't believe that Christ could not accomplish that which He set out to accomplish.  Doesn't sound very sovereign.

    Of course, the forgiven and the not forgiven.  The latter are not left out of the plan of God.  On the contrary, their fallenness is one of the tools that God uses to sanctify His children. 

    This is getting monotonous.  I'll say it slowly.  Only...the...elect...shall...faithfully...call...on...the...name...of...the...Lord. 

    Oh...please do. :rolleyes:
  8. sola fide

    sola fide neo-Puritan

    Amen Reformationist. The entire gospel account of the Apostle John testifies to the particular nature of redemption. Christ said in John chapter 6 that no man comes to me unless the Father who sent Me draws him. The greek word for draw in that passage is used at least 2 other times in the new testament, and both of those times it is translated to drag (James 2:6, Acts 16:19). No that doesn't mean that God drags people kicking and screaming into heaven, but since all are on a collision course headed for hell, He must stop his chosen from being consumed by their sin.
    If Christ is the good shephard that lays down His life for the sheep, then He must have a flock, one flock. He lays down His life for the sheep, not for the other ravenous animals that roam about. He only lays down His life for the sheep. Of course there are universal benefits to the atonement, in that Satan's power upon the earth is bound. But those God has not chosen will remain under sin's sway.
    All men receive the outward call of God. They are accountable for their sin. They are all called to repent. But only God can grant a man true repentance. To say that Christ died for all is to say that He died for people who are already in hell. To say He died just as much for Judas as He did for Peter. I say the scriptures say otherwise. God's special grace is given to those who are saved. Can you say that no more grace was given to Peter than to Judas, to Jacob than to Esau? I don't believe so. To say that Christ's redemption is applied equally to everyone is to say that we, believers, have no more reason to give thanks than the average everyday pagan. Christ did not fail in His purpose. When He said it is finished, He meant it is finished. Not 'it's hypothetically finished, now I hope some will choose Me despite their sin'. No, He accomplished what He purposed, He shed His blood for His sheep, His death was sufficient for all, but it is only efficient in those He has chosen. If the purpose of His death was to save every single person, then every single person would be saved; lest you believe Christ to be a failure.

    Grace to you.
  9. Andrew

    Andrew Well-Known Member

    Hello!, of course not, but the free gift has been offered to all (that's my pt) as the verse says. And how can a gift be a free grace gift if there's a "I belong to the elect" qualifier.

    you just contradicted yourself. a loving God who created all cant send some to hell, yet he can hate some? we have different ideas on sovereignity.

    okay, it has boiled down to you having to change or add to scipture to fit your theory. Limited Atonement, as the term implies, limits the grace and forgiveness of God, limits the work of the Son, and limits the blood to some elite bunch. 'LIMITED' atonement! can you imagine that. Might as well call it God's LIMITED Love towards man.

    Such a doctrine is never Christ-exalting hence not Spirit-inspired, and will never draw sinners to Christ.

    so, ADIOS!
  10. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story


    I posted this in another thread, but I'm not sure you saw it:


    Would you please explain your beliefs of how God can by Just and Loving when:

    1. It is His will that all of us were made into sinners worthy of death.
    2. It is His will that some of those sinners are saved.
    3. It is His will that the rest of those sinners burn in Hell.
    4. There is no difference between these two groups of sinners before salvation.

    Thank you.
  11. Reformationist

    Reformationist Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

    United States
    I saw it.  Here's my answer in that other thread.

    Hey man, I just want to tell you something.  The way you are responding and posting is truly commendable.  I admire the fact that you are setting such a good example.  You are an extremely intelliegent individual, sometimes too smart for me, and I think we can all learn a lot from you.

    God bless
  12. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    Woah. Thanks Ref. :)

    I am also too passionate for my own good sometimes, which is why I slip into posting in bad style. Doh.
  13. Reformationist

    Reformationist Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

    United States
    True as that may be I believe God uses the behaviors of others, be it good or bad, to show us our own weaknesses.  I know that when I encounter someone who is "posting in bad style" what I should feel is compassion because I should definitely know what it's like to post that way, as I do it often.  I think it would be great if we all looked at the way others act and it caused us to reflect upon our own sinfulness.  And, our first concern should be to help the other person, regardless of how they act to us.  That is true biblical love.

    God bless
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.