Good News, Really?

[gmm4j]

Good News?
Mark 16:15-16
He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Based on your understanding of particular atonement, how is it "good news to all creation," when according to Calvinism, God had Jesus sufficiently suffer enough to save the whole human race1, but chose and predetermined before anyone had done anything good or bad, to not elect, regenerate, give faith to, or even give Christ’s sufficient sacrifice to most of creation, thereby, effectively condemning them to hell?

(The question is referring to the content of the message of particular atonement, not the hearer’s perception)



1Limited atonement correctly recognizes that Christ’s death was of infinite value and lacking in nothing. In fact it is of such value that had God so willed, Christ’s death could have saved every member of the human race. Christ would not have had to suffer any more or do anything different to save every human who ever lived than He did in securing the salvation of the elect. But that was not God’s purpose in sending Christ to the cross. God’s purpose in the atonement was that Jesus would secure forever the salvation of those the Father had given to Him (Hebrews 7:25). Therefore while Christ’s atonement was limited in its intent or purpose, it was unlimited in its power.


Election from the foundation of the world based on an unconditional decree makes condemnation unreal to the elect, and makes the offer of salvation unreal to the non-elect. For the elect there is no bad news and for the non-elect there is no good news – even though Scripture indicates otherwise.

 

[Lilly Owl]

I get confused and quite frankly walk away from philosophies wherein an individual, in this case Calvin, translates the good news to fit a certain criteria.

When God sent Jesus to take the worlds sin upon himself on the cross I believe that. I don't think it's fair to God or Jesus sacrifice for mortal men whom are the sinners God sought to save, purport to deliver an interpretation of God's words that claims God only meant that salvation to include a few.
That's not good news at all.

 

[bling]

It could still be good news, if they accept it as good or not good. The message is the same and we can’t change it to make it good for those that will reject it.

 

[Johnnz]

Calvin was wrong in his understanding of some Scriptures.

John
NZ

 

[reformed ttL]

Good News?
Mark 16:15-16
He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Based on your understanding of particular atonement, how is it "good news to all creation," when according to Calvinism, God had Jesus sufficiently suffer enough to save the whole human race1, but chose and predetermined before anyone had done anything good or bad, to not elect, regenerate, give faith to, or even give Christ’s sufficient sacrifice to most of creation, thereby, effectively condemning them to hell?

(The question is referring to the content of the message of particular atonement, not the hearer’s perception)



1Limited atonement correctly recognizes that Christ’s death was of infinite value and lacking in nothing. In fact it is of such value that had God so willed, Christ’s death could have saved every member of the human race. Christ would not have had to suffer any more or do anything different to save every human who ever lived than He did in securing the salvation of the elect. But that was not God’s purpose in sending Christ to the cross. God’s purpose in the atonement was that Jesus would secure forever the salvation of those the Father had given to Him (Hebrews 7:25). Therefore while Christ’s atonement was limited in its intent or purpose, it was unlimited in its power.


Election from the foundation of the world based on an unconditional decree makes condemnation unreal to the elect, and makes the offer of salvation unreal to the non-elect. For the elect there is no bad news and for the non-elect there is no good news – even though Scripture indicates otherwise.

you armin keep asking the wrong questions , you should be asking why would God save anyone knowing all we ever do is sin, our greatest works are as filthy rags, so we should be asking since we never would do any good works any way. why would God even save any of us? thats the question that you should be asking

 

[gmm4j]

For the Glory of a loving God who loves His creation.

 

[janxharris]

you armin keep asking the wrong questions , you should be asking why would God save anyone knowing all we ever do is sin, our greatest works are as filthy rags, so we should be asking since we never would do any good works any way. why would God even save any of us? thats the question that you should be asking

With respect, you have not answered the question.

 

[janxharris]

It could still be good news, if they accept it as good or not good. The message is the same and we can’t change it to make it good for those that will reject it.

If the unregenerate are unwilling and unable to believe then the Gospel is NEVER good news to them. That the Gospel is good news proves they are able and can be willing.

 

[reformed ttL]

With respect, you have not answered the question.

with respect .the op just did/ and i dont disagree with the answer , otoh i feel like this is goading calvinists like so many do on here ,why ask if you already know the answer?? that is why i answered the way i did. happy???

 

[janxharris]

with respect .the op just did/ and i dont disagree with the answer , otoh i feel like this is goading calvinists like so many do on here ,why ask if you already know the answer?? that is why i answered the way i did. happy???

Sorry reformed ttL, I don't follow you.

The OP is a legitimate question that challenges Reformed Theology.
These are serious issues because if Reformed Theology were proven to be true, I for one would cease to believe in Christ.

 

[OzSpen]

Calvin was wrong in his understanding of some Scriptures.

John
NZ

Which Scriptures did Calvin interpret incorrectly, John?

Oz

 

[janxharris]

Reformed Theology is bad news for the unconditional non-elect.

Mat 4:23
Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people.

Mark 16:15,16
He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Jesus Christ's sacrifice is good news for all
Reformed Theology teaches bad news for the non-elect
Reformed Theology is, therefore, false

 

[JackSparrow]

you armin keep asking the wrong questions , you should be asking why would God save anyone knowing all we ever do is sin, our greatest works are as filthy rags, so we should be asking since we never would do any good works any way. why would God even save any of us? thats the question that you should be asking

One of the teachers in the recent shooting gave her life trying to save a child by using her own body as a shield to take the bullets.

That is most definitely a good work. Ok not enough to get her saved if she was not already but still a mighty good work none the less.

The 'filthy rags' are relative. Nothing humans do is good enough to to reach the mighty goal of heaven. No non calvinist says or believes they are.

 

[nobdysfool]

Reformed Theology is bad news for the unconditional non-elect.

Jesus Christ's sacrifice is good news for all
Reformed Theology teaches bad news for the non-elect
Reformed Theology is, therefore, false

Reformed theology is not what you claim it is. Being non-Reformed, you are the least qualified to be speaking to what Reformed Theology teaches.

Your information is faulty, therefore your conclusions are faulty. We preach to all, that the elect will be brought to faith and salvation. Those who do not believe, simply confirm their standing before God, that of condemnation and deserved punishment. And ALL men deserve Hellfire, apart from Christ. Therefore, there is no injustice with God if He passes them by, and does not bring them to Himself (because that's the only way they will come).

 

[janxharris]

Reformed theology is not what you claim it is. Being non-Reformed, you are the least qualified to be speaking to what Reformed Theology teaches.

Your information is faulty, therefore your conclusions are faulty. We preach to all, that the elect will be brought to faith and salvation. Those who do not believe, simply confirm their standing before God, that of condemnation and deserved punishment. And ALL men deserve Hellfire, apart from Christ. Therefore, there is no injustice with God if He passes them by, and does not bring them to Himself (because that's the only way they will come).

Which bit of what I said was incorrect?

 

[janxharris]

Reformed theology is not what you claim it is. Being non-Reformed, you are the least qualified to be speaking to what Reformed Theology teaches.

Your information is faulty, therefore your conclusions are faulty. We preach to all, that the elect will be brought to faith and salvation. Those who do not believe, simply confirm their standing before God, that of condemnation and deserved punishment. And ALL men deserve Hellfire, apart from Christ. Therefore, there is no injustice with God if He passes them by, and does not bring them to Himself (because that's the only way they will come).

Is Christ's crucifixion and resurrection good news for the non-elect?
If so, why?

 

[Eddie L]

Is Christ's crucifixion and resurrection good news for the non-elect?
If so, why?

The gospel is not good news for anyone who will never believe it. A person who dies a dedicated Muslim or an Atheist will never consider the gospel to be good news. It did not help their situation. In fact, in the end, it will be very bad news for them.

For those of us who live in the "world of the means", though, the gospel is good news because it provides hope for the whole world. Because of the gospel, anyone who believes from any nation and tribe has the sure hope of redemption in Christ. This would be excellent news for any gentile who thought their only basis to a right standing with God was through adherence to a Jewish law that they did not understand and could not obey. The good news is that the world is reconciled to God via the work of Jesus.

Now, does that mean it is good news to every individual ever born? Of course not. The gospel is not good news to those who will end up in Hell, whether you're a Calvinist, an Arminian, or anything else.

 

[Skala]

Election from the foundation of the world based on an unconditional decree makes condemnation unreal to the elect, and makes the offer of salvation unreal to the non-elect. For the elect there is no bad news and for the non-elect there is no good news – even though Scripture indicates otherwise.

That's like saying broccoli is not good news to people who refuse to eat vegetables.

The non elect don't care about Christ. Its their own fault that the gospel is not good news for them. They hate him. In fact, we are all hostile to God except for God changing our hearts by grace.

That is the boast of the Calvinist.

What is the Arminian's boast? That you somehow, by an act of the will, decided to be converted? Good job Holy Spirit! You are doing a fantastic job. Oh wait, you aren't the Holy Spirit are you? You are a human. Therefore, you cannot do conversion.

The good news of the gospel is that anyone who wants to repent and believe can do so and be saved. It's their own fault for not wanting to repent and believe. If they wanted to, they could. Nothing is stopping them except their own unwillingness.

Why is some people's unwillingness the fault of Calvinism? Calvinism is simply pointing out what is evident: men are unwilling, except God replace our stony hearts with hearts of flesh.

That seems like God-honoring theology to me.

 

[reformed ttL]

One of the teachers in the recent shooting gave her life trying to save a child by using her own body as a shield to take the bullets.

That is most definitely a good work. Ok not enough to get her saved if she was not already but still a mighty good work none the less.

The 'filthy rags' are relative. Nothing humans do is good enough to to reach the mighty goal of heaven. No non calvinist says or believes they are.

your point? oh yeah mans not that bad same old statements

 

[reformed ttL]

Sorry reformed ttL, I don't follow you.

The OP is a legitimate question that challenges Reformed Theology.
These are serious issues because if Reformed Theology were proven to be true, I for one would cease to believe in Christ.

my point is the questions are always flawed, they come off as not being correct what reformers beileive i have watched most of these threads and they are set up to trap and goad reformers, and no matter the answers that some very knowledgeable reformers give, its like you dont hear what they say,its like some here dont know how holy God is or how sinfull man is or both.