Did Jesus die for all?

[Peaceful1]

Christ died for all.

Peace

 

[Andrew]

Great, so far 14 here believe God loved everyone and died for everyone, only 3 voted he shed his blood for some! Thank God its not the other way round or Christmas wld have to take on a whole diff meaning

 

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Br. Max
Christ died that all CAN be saved.  That does not mean all WILL be saved.  Sadly, not all will avail themselves of the opportunity God has afforded us.

So the death of Christ accomplished the possibility of my salvation but did not actually save me?  If His works didn't accomplish my salvation who should I credit my salvation to?

God bless

 

[dignitized]

Reformationist: you are saved by the sacrifice of Christ if you accept that free gift given by God

 

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by hugoguttman
Well, that´s right. I need to accept that Jesus Christ being God, he made himself man and came to this world to die for my sins and I must Confess that fact in order to be save.

Again I ask, how does one commit the act of "accepting" Jesus?  Is it a decision you make to believe that what the Bible says is true?

Why do you think there are a LOT of people who doesnot believe in Jesus?

Uh...because mankind inherited a fallen nature.  Until a person is saved he/she does not believe in Christ (Rom 3:10-18).

I am not talking about muslims or people from other religions... I´m talking about people who follows Catholic faith? Jehova Whitnesses? Mormons? It´s written: So many are called but very few elected.

I wasn't aware that there were alot of Catholics that didn't believe in Jesus.  Actually, that verse is, "For many are called, but few chosen."  So you believe that the reason a person doesn't believe in Jesus is because they weren't elected to do so?

Sorry for expressing my ideas without looking at an english Bible. I got one now, so the next post will be suported with Holly Scripture.

Well, you speak better English than I do Tanzanian.

I got one now, so the next post will be suported with Holly Scripture.

Is that the Christmas version of Scripture?

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Br. Max
Reformationist: you are saved by the sacrifice of Christ if you accept that free gift given by God

Okay.  Maybe you can answer this question.  How does one "accept" the Gift?  Is it a decision you make?

Thanks,

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Andrew
Great, so far 14 here believe God loved everyone and died for everyone, only 3 voted he shed his blood for some! Thank God its not the other way round or Christmas wld have to take on a whole diff meaning

I sure hope you don't mean this in the way that it sounds.  Could you explain please?

God bless

 

[Outspoken]

Hmm..seems like a battle over semantics..Christ died for the OPPERTUNITY that all should come to him. Those that accept him are the ones that realize and accept Christ and are those he died for.

 

You all seem to misunderstand. Saying Christ died for the elect is not exclusionary, it is saying the others did not accept it and thus it is not waisted on them.

 

[Andrew]

quote: "I sure hope you don't mean this in the way that it sounds.Ê Could you explain please?"

well, Christmas is about the saviour coming to save sinners. how are we going to effectively reach the lost this season if we believe that some sinners are not covered by the love of God and the blood of Jesus?

for me, if i believe in limited atonement, i'd prob ask myself, hhmmm maybe Jesus didnt die for this guy and i shld give up on him, esp if its a tough case. that's what i mean.

 

[devoted]

Reformist,

I am not about to copy and paste all these post so I will try to address you as best as I can by memory.

John 15:16

"You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that you should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in my name, He may give it you."

Justification through "acceptance" is because God has given us actual grace. So this means we are justified by grace alone, the grace that God gives us to make our will capable of accepting him. So yes we are saved by the grace of God.

Actual grace also aids us to resist in temptations but the choice is always ours, whether or not we are going to commit that sin. St. Paul spoke of this when he said that we would not be tested beyond our strength. This is actual grace. God also gives this freely. I can not earn this grace of help from him, I can ask him for it, but where does my ability to ask him come from? Yes, that’s right, grace.

Sanctifying grace is something different. Sanctifying grace is the grace we receive to participate in the very life of God. "We become partakers in the divine nature." This occurs after we have been "born again", "We put off the old man and put on the new man". We have been given "new life" "in Christ."

Now I do realize that there will be some differences on opinion on how one can receive this new life, but for the sake of this argument so to speak I will not muddy the waters with those differences.

Back to the above scripture, a commentary from St Augustine on this passage. 

   

Ineffable grace! For what were we before Christ had chosen us, but wicked, and lost? We did not believe in Him, so as to be chosen by Him: for had He chosen us believing, He would have chosen us choosing. This passage refutes the vain opinion of those who say that we were chosen before the foundation of the world, because God foreknew that we should be good, not that He Himself would make us good. For had He chosen us, because He foreknew that we should be good, He would have foreknown also that we should first choose Him, for without choosing Him we cannot be good; unless indeed he can be called good, who has not chosen good. What then has He chosen in them who are not good? you can not say, I am chosen because I believed; for had you believed in Him, you had chosen Him. Nor can you say, Before I believed I did good works, and therefore was chosen. For what good work is there before faith? What is there for us to say then, but that we were wicked, and were chosen, that by the grace of the chosen we might become good? ... They are chosen then before the foundation of the world, according to that predestination by which God foreknew His future acts. They are chosen out of the world by that call whereby God fulfills what He has predestined: whom He did predestine, them He also called (Rom 8:30). ... Observe, He does not choose the good; but those, whom He has chosen, He makes good: And I have ordained you that you should go, and bring forth fruit. This is the fruit which He meant, when He said, Without Me you can do nothing. He Himself is the way in which He has set us to go.

 

It's getting late, I will have to respond to the rest later. Thanks.

 

[Outspoken]

"hhmmm maybe Jesus didnt die for this guy and i shld give up on him, esp if its a tough case. that's what i mean."

Then you have a wrong way of thinking about limited atoinment because no person I know that believes in that idea thinks that way. they think quite the opposite, and you building a bad idea and applying it to all people isn't a great idea Andrew

 

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Andrew
well, Christmas is about the saviour coming to save sinners. how are we going to effectively reach the lost this season if we believe that some sinners are not covered by the love of God and the blood of Jesus?

I was kinda hoping you didn't mean this.  What is it you think we, who believe in this doctrine, do?  Do you think we go around looking at other people saying, "Yeah, well, they're probably not part of the elect, and those people over there, definitely not part of the elect, and see that guy, not part of the elect."  It's like you're on a mission to prove we're these uncaring individuals who make judgements as to who is part of the elect and who isn't.  I gotta tell you, you stress it a lot more than I do.  I never question whether someone is of the elect.  I assume that everyone I meet will be saved by God.  It's not our job to determine who will be saved so why do you keep implying that is what we do? 

for me, if i believe in limited atonement, i'd prob ask myself, hhmmm maybe Jesus didnt die for this guy and i shld give up on him, esp if its a tough case. that's what i mean.

Okay.  That would be your sin, not a problem with the view.  This is what most people do.  They think about the sinful way in which they would deal with a knowledge of this doctrine and they assume that is the natural result of learning this truth.  It's not.  That's called immaturity or an ignorance of the truth of this view.  Neither of those are a problem with the view.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Outspoken
"Then you have a wrong way of thinking about limited atoinment because no person I know that believes in that idea thinks that way. they think quite the opposite, and you building a bad idea and applying it to all people isn't a great idea Andrew

Exactly.  Learn the truth of a belief before you start stereotyping the people that believe it.

God bless

 

[Ioustinos]

Originally posted by Andrew
Great, so far 14 here believe God loved everyone and died for everyone, only 3 voted he shed his blood for some! Thank God its not the other way round or Christmas wld have to take on a whole diff meaning

I am one of three. I still like Christmas

 

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Jesaiah
I am one of three. I still like Christmas

I see that I'm in good company!

God bless

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Originally posted by sola fide
Once again, I believe that to say that Christ died for the sins of every single person, then to acknowledge that some are in hell, is to say that He failed in what He purposed to accomplish. And I am proud to say that Christ did not fail, He accomplished all that He set out to do.

Grace to you

I don't see it that way at all.

Jesus died for the sins of the world (John 3:16).  What He did at the cross was completed.  He did not fail because some refuse Him.  

Again, I point out 2 Peter 3:9.  He is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.  Scripture also says He is not a respector of persons (Acts 10:34).

What part of "all" is leaving anyone out? 

 

 

[Andrew]

Once again, I believe that to say that Christ died for the sins of every single person, then to acknowledge that some are in hell, is to say that He failed in what He purposed to accomplish...

It is to say what is consistent with scripture. Christ died for all, not all will except his pardon. that's all over the NT.

eg: Why in the world wld Paul preach to all those pharisees, arguing with them for days, preach to kings and all (as we read in Acts), who in the end rejected the Christ, when in the first place the Gospel of salvation is not offered to them??? I mean wldnt God have whispered in his ear or showed him a vision and said:" Hey, stop wasting your time, i didnt die for their sins, i left them out.Ó

What right has he to preach to these people, rebuke them, ask them to repent etc, when salvation is not even offered to them?

It's like scolding a man and sending him to jail for not coming to your party when you did not even want to invite him in the first place!

How in the world can there be the unpardonable sin of rejecting Christ (undoubtedly there will be those who reject Christ and his work) when Christ and his work on th ecross is not even offered to the person in the first place? How in the world can you reject something that's not offered to you? heeellllllloooooo!

i'm done

 

[dignitized]

lol I love it.

Jesus Christ died upon the cross for the salvation of the WORLD. He offers his life as the ransom for us ALL. Does that mean that if Reformationist (I hope you don't mind me using you as an example) cursed God and died that God has failed? NO!!! The gift of salvation is there for all who will come unto Christ, yes even reformationist and he will save all who receive the gift of salvation. Many will NOT come unto Christ. Does that mean he did not die for them? No. It means that they are not covered by his death.

Its like in the OT with the Passover. ANYONE who was in the house marked with the blood of the lamb was covered by the death of that lamb. There were people who were not Jewish who were covered just as there were I'm sure Jews who did not place the mark upon their homes. OR - if you don't like that analogy - Its like the Temple. Christ on the cross in analogous to the OT Temple. He is fixed in one place as he hangs upon the cross just as the temple is fixed in one place. The people of Israel having the knowledge that their salvation rested in the Sacrificial laws were compelled to go to the temple from where ever in the world it was that they were - just as we are compelled to come to Christ on the cross to receive His sacrifice. IF a Jew did not come to the temple and do what was required of him by the Law for his salvation - does that make GOD a failure?


Chew on it . . . .


God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Quaffer
I don't see it that way at all.

Jesus died for the sins of the world (John 3:16).  What He did at the cross was completed.  He did not fail because some refuse Him.

I think the point you're missing is that Christ's goal wasn't to die at the Cross.  It was to reconcile sinners to their Father in Heaven.  If His goal was to reconcile all sinners to the Father and you say, and I agree, that doesn't happen then you are saying that He failed in His goal of bringing all people to salvation.  

Again, I point out 2 Peter 3:9.  He is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.  Scripture also says He is not a respector of persons (Acts 10:34).

Once again, the target audience there is CHRISTIANS.  You can continue to ignore this very pertinant fact but it doesn't change the fact that 2 Peter was written to CHRISTIANS.  Look at the sentence:

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering TOWARD US, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

He clearly qualifies the "all" with the "us."  The us isn't the whole world.  It's Peter and his ELECT brethren.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Andrew
How in the world can there be the unpardonable sin of rejecting Christ

That's not the unpardonable sin.  Every time you sin you reject Christ.  Every time you act contrary to your new nature you reject Christ.  You rejected Christ your entire life until He saved you, and had He not, you would have continued to reject Him.  Again I say, that is not the unpardonable sin.

God bless