"All"

[TSIBHOD]

Is it possible for a Calvinist to believe that "salvation is available to every individual" if the meaning is clarified the right way? Or do you think that that is definitely not a Calvinist statement.

 

[Imblessed]

would you care to clarify what it means?

 

[TSIBHOD]

would you care to clarify what it means?

I'm letting Calvinists clarify it. I'm just wondering Calvinists here can find some sense to give the statement so that they would agree with it.

There are some things to which I say, "That's definitely not true." There are other things to which I say, "That could be true, depending on how you define it." So I'm wondering what Calvinists think about my original statement. Do they think it is definitely not true, or do they think that it could be true if it was defined in the right way?

 

[Imblessed]

I'm letting Calvinists clarify it. I'm just wondering Calvinists here can find some sense to give the statement so that they would agree with it.

There are some things to which I say, "That's definitely not true." There are other things to which I say, "That could be true, depending on how you define it." So I'm wondering what Calvinists think about my original statement. Do they think it is definitely not true, or do they think that it could be true if it was defined in the right way?

Ah, I see! (really, I do! )

Well, as a calvinist, I personally would say that "That's definately not true"

n't think that any clarification or change of definition would make it true. I think the command for ALL to repent is true, but I don't think that salvation is available to ALL. Belief in predestination negates that option, in my opinion.

Maybe a Calvinist will come on here and put it in a different way, a way that would make it true, but I can't think of one.

 

[frumanchu]

Is it possible for a Calvinist to believe that "salvation is available to every individual" if the meaning is clarified the right way? Or do you think that that is definitely not a Calvinist statement.

I would have to say it is true, depending on the context of the statement.

The Gospel is preached to all men, elect and reprobate alike. All men have free will in the sense that they have the natural ability to choose according to their desire. But only the elect, upon regeneration by the Holy Spirit, have the moral ability to choose Christ. The will of the unregenerate man is in slavery to sin. Only when he is freed from the wicked desires of his own heart can he truly incline himself to good and to God.

Salvation is available to every individual, but only the elect shall lay hold of it.

 

[drstevej]

The "Liver & Onions Parable"

The Reformed Doctrine of Free Will

Suppose you detest L&O. The sight and smell makes you sick.


Just once, to appease the insistence of a friend that L&O really is good tasting, touched your tongue's tip to the L&O and the taste repulsed you.

You are invited to a buffet where a friend suggests you try some L&O. You refuse. He insists that the L&O is wonderful. He takes a bite and smiles saying "Just try it." You say, "No way!"

You freely reject the L&O because of your senses (sight, taste and smell). You do so on this occasion and every occasion it is offered to you. Your action regarding L&O is predictable and certain.

► SUCH is the unregenerate person's free rejection of God because his heart and nature is only evil continuously.

===

Now suppose this L&O loather is supernaturally changed into a L&O lover.

God changes his taste buds as well as olfactory and mental responses. Now, at the buffet he asks his friend, "What smells so good?" He is surprised to find that the great smell comes from a plate of L&O! He is further surprised that it really doesn't look that bad now, in fact it looks good. He is salivating.

He grabs a fork and timidly takes a small bite to his tongue for a test. The test becomes a taste -- then he eats a huge serving. L&O has suddenly become his favorite food. From that day on he looks for L&O whenever he can find it and he specifically requests it. He is a L&O lover now.

He freely and predictably chooses L&O after this craving has been placed upon him by God.

► SUCH is the response of one who is regenerated by receiving a new heart and nature.

====

BTW, in Heaven... Everyone loves L&O. Nothing else is eaten or even desired. All freely savor the smell and taste of L&O forever and ever. Hallelujah!


​

 

[Jon_]

Is it possible for a Calvinist to believe that "salvation is available to every individual" if the meaning is clarified the right way? Or do you think that that is definitely not a Calvinist statement.

No. God determines the availability of salvation. This is the doctrine of limited or particular atonement. Christ's sacrifice was effective only for the elect; therefore, salvation is only for the elect.

 

[Imblessed]

I would have to say it is true, depending on the context of the statement.

The Gospel is preached to all men, elect and reprobate alike. All men have free will in the sense that they have the natural ability to choose according to their desire. But only the elect, upon regeneration by the Holy Spirit, have the moral ability to choose Christ. The will of the unregenerate man is in slavery to sin. Only when he is freed from the wicked desires of his own heart can he truly incline himself to good and to God.

Salvation is available to every individual, but only the elect shall lay hold of it.

see I knew someone more qualified than I would find a way to make it true!

nice explanation Fru

 

[TSIBHOD]

God determines the availability of salvation. This is the doctrine of limited or particular atonement. Christ's sacrifice was effective only for the elect; therefore, salvation is only for the elect.

You answered "No," but do these statements really disagree with what frumanchu said? I know that the doctrine of Limited Atonement means that Christ's sacrifice was effective only for the elect, but is this necessarily always at odd with the statement, "Salvation is available to every individual"?

 

[Jon_]

You answered "No," but do these statements really disagree with what frumanchu said? I know that the doctrine of Limited Atonement means that Christ's sacrifice was effective only for the elect, but is this necessarily always at odd with the statement, "Salvation is available to every individual"?

It's a semantical argument, I think.

When you consider that God has already preordained those who will accept Christ and those who will not, the scope of the question defeats itself. Salvation is not available to the reprobate because God has already preordained that they will not believe. It is similarly true that it is unavailable because they would never willingly accept it. Either way, both statements are accurate, so it doesn't do a whole lot of good to argue which one is "more correct."

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[Antman_05]

1 Tim 2:4
4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.http://www.christianforums.com/t1591486-all.html#_ftn3


http://www.christianforums.com/t1591486-all.html#_ftnref3The New King James Version. 1996, c1982 . Thomas Nelson: Nashville

OK the way i look at this is, yes God desires all to come to salvation this is showing what God's heart is but it doesn't mean all will be saved as God hasn't predestined all to come to Salvation. The reason for this is best stated in Romans 9:15 and 18.
Romans 9:15
15 For He says to Moses, x“I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.”http://www.christianforums.com/t1591486-all.html#_ftn2 x Ex. 33:19

http://www.christianforums.com/t1591486-all.html#_ftnref2The New King James Version. 1996, c1982 . Thomas Nelson: Nashville
Romans 9:18
18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He ahardens.http://www.christianforums.com/t1591486-all.html#_ftn2 a Ex. 4:21; Deut. 2:30; Josh. 11:20; John 12:40; Rom. 11:7, 25

http://www.christianforums.com/t1591486-all.html#_ftnref2The New King James Version. 1996, c1982 . Thomas Nelson: Nashville

 

[Lockheed]

Antman, have you considered that v. 1 -2 is expressing a different kind of people than people would normally pray for?

1Ti 2:1-2 First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.
​

Thus v4 is not saying God desires something He cannot have, rather, that God desires to save even kings and those in authority.

Finally, this is just another view of that passage. Yet another view is found here: http://homepage.mac.com/shanerosenthal/reformationink/sratonement.htm

 

[Antman_05]

The only problem with what your saying is that in the Greek the word all does mean all, mean everyone, or as Jesus put it "whosoever". So the most logical conclusion is just what i put up.

 

[Lockheed]

The only problem with what your saying is that in the Greek the word all does mean all, mean everyone, or as Jesus put it "whosoever". So the most logical conclusion is just what i put up.

There's no problem with "all" meaning "all", the problem is whether "all" means "each and every person who ever lived". This is clearly not the case given Romans 9.

 

[Antman_05]

LOL, what the, for real. If all doesn't mean all as in everyone then what does all mean, most but not all.

 

[Jon_]

LOL, what the, for real. If all doesn't mean all as in everyone then what does all mean, most but not all.

It means all of a specific group--like Christians.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[Antman_05]

G3956

πᾶς

pas

pas

Including all the forms of declension; apparently a primary word; all, any, every, the whole: - all (manner of, means) alway (-s), any (one), X daily, + ever, every (one, way), as many as, + no (-thing), X throughly, whatsoever, whole, whosoever.

 

[Antman_05]

Thats the Greek All means all not just Christians, dang i could be a good Weslyan, to bad i think He got it wrong.

 

[frumanchu]

LOL, what the, for real. If all doesn't mean all as in everyone then what does all mean, most but not all.

The Greek word pas has many different meanings. The simplest translation is "all" but the assumption that all means each and every individual thing or person is not necessarily correct.

Consider the following verse in the KJV:

1 Timothy 6:10For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

Love of money is the root of all evil? Did Adam transgress the commandment of God in the garden for financial gain? Of course not.



Now consider another translation:

For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. (ESV, emphasis added)​

​

This makes much more sense. Money motivates men to commit all sorts of unrighteous acts, but not every unrighteous act that man does is motivated by the love of money.


Consider the following by Spurgeon, which I believe to be an apt description of the word:

​

... "the whole world has gone after him" Did all the world go after Christ? "then went all Judea, and were baptized of him in Jordan." Was all Judea, or all Jerusalem, baptized in Jordan? "Ye are of God, little children", and the whole world lieth in the wicked one". Does the whole world there mean everybody? The words "world" and "all" are used in some seven or eight senses in Scripture, and it is very rarely the "all" means all persons, taken individually. The words are generally used to signify that Christ has redeemed some of all sorts -- some Jews, some Gentiles, some rich, some poor, and has not restricted His redemption to either Jew or Gentile ...​

​

- C.H. Spurgeon, from a sermon on Particular Redemption


​

​

 

[Lockheed]

From Calvin's Commentary of 1 Timothy...

But not to dwell longer than is proper on a matter that is not essential, Paul, in my own opinion, simply enjoins that, whenever public prayers are offered, petitions and supplications should be made for all men, even for those who at present are not at all related to us. And yet this heaping up of words is not superfluous; but Paul appears to me purposely to join together three terms for the same purpose, in order to recommend more warmly, and urge more strongly, earnest and constant prayer. We know now sluggish we are in this religious duty; and therefore we need not wonder if, for the purpose of arousing us to it, the Holy Spirit, by the mouth of Paul, employs various excitements...


Hence we see the childish folly of those who represent this passage to be opposed to predestination. “If God” say they, “wishes all men indiscriminately to be saved, it is false that some are predestined by his eternal purpose to salvation, and others to perdition.” They might have had some ground for saying this, if Paul were speaking here about individual men; although even then we should not have wanted the means of replying to their argument; for, although the: will of God ought not to be judged from his secret decrees, when he reveals them to us by outward signs, yet it does not therefore follow that he has not determined with himself what he intends to do as to every individual man.

But I say nothing on that subject, because it has nothing to do with this passage; for the Apostle simply means, that there is no people and no rank in the world that is excluded from salvation; because God wishes that the gospel should be proclaimed to all without exception. Now the preaching of the gospel gives life; and hence he justly concludes that God invites all equally to partake salvation. But the present discourse relates to classes of men, and not to individual persons; for his sole object is, to include in this number princes and foreign nations. That God wishes the doctrine of salvation to be enjoyed by them as well as others, is evident from the passages already quoted, and from other passages of a similar nature. Not without good reason was it said, “Now, kings, understand,” and again, in the same Psalm,

“I will give thee the Gentiles for an inheritance, and the ends of the earth for a possession.” (<190208>Psalm 2:8-10.)​

In a word, Paul intended to shew that it is our duty to consider, not what kind of persons the princes at that time were, but what God wished them to be. Now the duty arising: out of that love which we owe to our neighbor is, to be solicitous and to do our endeavor for the salvation of all whom God includes in his calling, and to testify this by godly prayers.

With the same view does he call God our Savior; for whence do we obtain salvation but from the undeserved kindness of God? Now the same God who has already made us partakers of salvation may sometime extend his grace to them also. He who hath already drawn us to him may draw them along with us. The Apostle takes for granted that God will do so, because it had been thus foretold by the predictions of the prophets, concerning all ranks and all nations.

http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment2/1tim.htm


​

----------




Let's take the "all means all" argument a step further.

Rom 5:18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.


​

Here in Romans 5:18 it states, clearly, that through Christ's act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to "all men".

G3956

&#960;&#945;&#834;&#962;
pas
pas
Including all the forms of declension; apparently a primary word; all, any, every, the whole: - all (manner of, means) alway (-s), any (one), X daily, + ever, every (one, way), as many as, + no (-thing), X throughly, whatsoever, whole, whosoever.

​

Look familar? The same Greek word for "all" in Romans 5:18 is the same for "all" in 1 Timothy 2:4.

What would the "all means all" view indicate for this passage but that "each and every individual who ever lived" is in fact justified by Christ's righteousness?

I don't think we as good scholars of the Bible are quite ready to say that "all means all" in every situation, especially in the writings of Paul. Therefore it is true that in some cases "all" doesn't mean "each and every individual that every lived" but sometimes means "all of a specific group" or even "all kinds".

As Calvin points out, it is all kinds of men that Paul has in view here, not the Arminian "each and every person who ever lived."