Jesus Christ: A Ransom for ALL

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The same Greek word is also used in Rev. 7:9 where it is rendered as "great".

Notice that here, it speaks of a specific group of individuals, and not all mankind. At the writing of this, John sees a group in heaven, while there is a group still on earth.

So much for "all".

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

shakewell

Active Member
Jun 17, 2013
310
56
✟40,638.00
Faith
Christian
"First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time " (1 Timothy 2:1-6)

Paul here very clearly says that Jesus Christ's Death, is "a Ransom for ALL".

I am well aware of the use of "all" and "world", etc, where there are cases the words do not mean "every", and must be taken it its context. As it does in John 12:19, where we read that "the world" had gone after Jesus, which cannot be understood as the "whole human race", but a "large number".

However, in the passage from First Timothy, it is very clear who the "all" for whom Jesus is a "Ransom". Paul urges us to pray for "ALL our leaders", and "ALL in authority", which can only mean "every single person", as rulers of countries, and governments, and those in any authority. Paul then says, "it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires ALL people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth", which must include the ALL "rulers" and "those in authority", everywhere in the world. It is these same "ALL" that he goes on to say, that Jesus was a "Ransom" for their sins. There is no way, without twisting what is said, that anyone can conclude from the us of ALL here, that Paul was only speaking of "elect" leaders. He does not use this word here. The ALL can only refer to the "entire human" race, which includes those as leaders and in authority, throughout the entire world.

The only people who will argue against this, are the sad Calvinists, who, rather than admit that their "theology" is flawed, and not in the Bible, will try to twist the plain meaning of what this passage teaches.

There is another similar passage with Paul, which will further show his desire for the salvation for "everyone without exception".

"King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe.” And Agrippa said to Paul, “In a short time would you persuade me to be a Christian?”And Paul said, “Whether short or long, I would to God that not only you but also ALL who hear me this day might become such as I am—except for these chains.” (Acts 26:27-29)

Paul is here witnessing to king Agrippa, who said that Paul was trying to "make him a Christian". Paul replies, that it was his desire (and not doubt, God's), that not only the king became a believer in Jesus Christ, but ALL who where in the king's palace that day! except his chains. It is very clear to anyone who is of an honest mind, and with no preconceived doctrines, that Paul meant just that. EVERY single person who was there that day, and heard his preaching, he wanted to become followers of the Lord Jesus Christ! It would be forcing the meaning of the passage, to assume that only those who were "elect" were present at this time! No doubt some would be deluded to think so!!!

Amen. Christ Jesus gave Himself a ransom for every single member of humanity, including the majority who will be spending eternity in the lake of fire for rejecting His free offer of salvation.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Marvin Knox
Upvote 0

MDC

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2017
1,127
511
48
Texas
✟59,701.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Amen. Christ Jesus gave Himself a ransom for every single member of humanity, including the majority who will be spending eternity in the lake of fire for rejecting His free offer of salvation.
So the debt and penalty for sin was paid for by Christ Jesus for all humanity, including those who will spend eternity in the lake of fire? Have you seriously thought about what you are saying?? Obviously there is no clue to what a ransom is and what it truly means. The whole meaning behind ransom is completely nullified by this deceptive twisting. What are they suffering in hell for then? ".. for He shall save His people from their sins.." Mathew 1:21. It's very evident that those who hold to this pelagian view are blinded from the truth of the gospel. And haven't been given eyes to see and a heart to believe. And gives more proof that there is absolutely no belief in the gospel of Christ to save them. This topic, and others relating to the doctrines of grace, goes round and round on this forum. And all it does is bring contentious bickering by the puffed up blind, who seek to justify their humanistic works righteousness by pulling certain scriptures and isolating them apart from its proper context. The pride of man will always hate that salvation is completely by Gods Sovereign grace and mercy, conditioned solely in Christ and His redemptive work... The elect will always believe and rest in this truth. The OP proves the motives behind starting this thread to begin with... to be contentious
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Amen. Christ Jesus gave Himself a ransom for every single member of humanity, including the majority who will be spending eternity in the lake of fire for rejecting His free offer of salvation.
While I am generally of the Reformed (or some would say “Calvinist”) camp – I agree with this post --- even though I'm sure that some Calvinists would call it “Arminian”.
I would like to ask that you refrain from calling people who adhere to Calvinist theology as if we "follow him".We were saved by Jesus, through the work of the Holy Spirit in us.
I like this sentiment because it is spot on. We are not Calvinists, Arminians, or even “Gill-ites” as it were.

We are simply students of the Bible who find the thoughts of certain theologians useful in expressing our own thoughts on the meaning of scripture.

Surely – as “Berean” minded disciples – we should feel free to agree with some of the thoughts of any given theologian and disagree just as freely. We do not blindly follow theologians without weighing each point - be they John Calvin, John Gill or the Pope of Rome.
and this he did "for many"; for as many as were ordained to eternal life; for as many as the Father gave unto him; for many out of every kindred, tongue, and people, and nation; but not for every individual of human nature; for many are not all."
John Gill Commentary on Mt. 20:28
"and to give his life a ransom for many;
even for all the elect of God, to redeem them from sin, Satan, and the law; and secure them from the wrath of God, and eternal death; and this he has done, by laying down his life as the ransom price for them;"
John Gill Commentary on Mk. 10:45
While I believe that Gill has much to offer concerning understanding the doctrines of grace – I believe he is wrong on this point. It seems that he too has a tendency to sometimes simply follow the party line when it comes to theology.

While I agree with those who point out that “all” does not always mean “all” – the doctrine of the atonement is a place where it means exactly that IMO.

Christ did indeed die for the sins of the elect. But He also died for those He would pass by as well.

All of us here are elect. I would hope that we all could at least agree on that. As such – Christ died for our sins some 2000 years ago.

Even so – we were all enemies of God until justified through faith.

“Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior.”

“And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.”

“Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”

“And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled.”

“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:”

“There is none that understands, there is none that seeks after God.”

“They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.”

“God is angry with the wicked every day.“

I received justification when I was 13 years of age. Paul was perhaps around 30 when he was saved. The thief on the cross was likely lost up until the very day he died. Ted Bundy was 42 when he was saved. Chuck Colson was 41 years old when he was justified before God. Many have received Christ at over 100 years of age on their deathbed.

All of us are part of the “elect” of God for whom Christ died. And yet we were as lost and as alienated from God as Adolf Hitler and Judas Iscariot up until the day we were saved by grace through faith.

Who is to say that a person could remain an enemy of God and a "child of wrath" for 13 or 100 years and not for eternity?

The life of every believer stands as a stark testimony of the illogical assumptions of those who teach a limited atonement.

God “reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” 2 cor. 5:18-21

People who believe in the doctrines of grace need to reject limited atonement. Christ died for the sins of the world and everyone in the world will still remain an enemy of God and under His wrath until the day they are justified through faith. That day may never come in this life and therefore they will remain God’s enemy throughout eternity in spite of Christ dying for their sins.

John Gill is a fine theologian. But then so was John Calvin.

I’m with Calvin on this one. If this means to some that John Calvin and I can't be called Calvinists- so be it. Calvin and I will gladly accept that. Calvin didn't follow anyone but the Lord and neither do I.

A FEW QUOTES BY JOHN CALVIN:

1 John 2:2--"he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world"----------------------- "CHRIST SUFFERED FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD. and in the goodness of God is OFFERED UNTO ALL MEN WITHOUT DISTINCTION, HIS BLOOD BEING SHED NOT FOR A PART OF THE WORLD ONLY, BUT FOR THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE; for although in the world nothing is found worthy of the favor of God, yet he HOLDS OUT THE PROPITIATION TO THE WHOLE WORLD, since without exception he SUMMONS ALL TO THE FAITH OF CHRIST, which is nothing else than the door unto hope."

Mark 14:24: "This is my blood of the new testament, WHICH IS SHED FOR MANY"..................... "The word 'many' DOES NOT MEAN A PART OF THE WORLD ONLY, BUT THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE: he contrasts many with one as if to say that he would not be the Redeemer of one man, but would meet death to deliver many of their cursed guilt. No doubt that in speaking to a few Christ wished to make His teaching available to a larger number...So when we come to the holy table not only should the general idea come to our mind that THE WORLD IS REDEEMED BY THE BLOOD OF CHRIST but also each should reckon to himself that his own sins are covered.

Romans 5:18: "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."
"Paul makes grace COMMON TO ALL MEN, not because it in fact EXTENDS TO ALL, but because IT IS OFFERED TO ALL. Although CHRIST SUFFERED FOR THE SINS OF THE WORLD. AND IS OFFERED BY THE GOODNESS OF GOD WITHOUT DISTINCTION TO ALL MEN, yet not all receive him"

Calvin's "LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT, April 25, 1564":
"I testify also and declare, that I suppliantly beg of Him, that He may be pleased so to was and purify me in the blood which my Sovereign Redeemer HAS SHED FOR THE SINS OF THE HUMAN RACE, that under His shadow I may be able to stand at the judgment-seat....

Mark 14:24 passage:
COMMENTARY ON A HARMONY OF THE EVANGELISTS, MATTHEW, MARK, AND LUKE, BY JOHN CALVIN
TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINAL LATIN, AND COLLATED WITH THE AUTHOR'S FRENCH VERSION, VOLUME THIRD BY THE REV. WILLIAM PRINGLE
CHRISTIAN CLASSICS ETHEREAL LIBRARY -- GRAND RAPIDS, MI

Romans 5:18 passage:
COMMENTARIES ON THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS
BY JOHN CALVIN
TRANSLATED AND EDITED BY THE REV. JOHN OWEN, VICAR OF THRUSSINGTON, LEICESTERSHIRE
CHRISTIAN CLASSICS ETHEREAL LIBRARY GRAND RAPIDS, MI

Concerning Calvin’s will:
History of the Christian Church, Volume VIII: Modern Christianity. “The Swiss Reformation”
§ 165. Calvin’s Last Will, and Farewells.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
So the debt and penalty for sin was paid for by Christ Jesus for all humanity, including those who will spend eternity in the lake of fire? Have you seriously thought about what you are saying?? Obviously there is no clue to what a ransom is and what it truly means. The whole meaning behind ransom is completely nullified by this deceptive twisting. What are they suffering in hell for then? ".. for He shall save His people from their sins.." Mathew 1:21. It's very evident that those who hold to this pelagian view are blinded from the truth of the gospel. And haven't been given eyes to see and a heart to believe. And gives more proof that there is absolutely no belief in the gospel of Christ to save them. This topic, and others relating to the doctrines of grace, goes round and round on this forum. And all it does is bring contentious bickering by the puffed up blind, who seek to justify their humanistic works righteousness by pulling certain scriptures and isolating them apart from its proper context. The pride of man will always hate that salvation is completely by Gods Sovereign grace and mercy, conditioned solely in Christ and His redemptive work... The elect will always believe and rest in this truth. The OP proves the motives behind starting this thread to begin with... to be contentious
This is the kind of attitude which gives Calvinism a bad name IMO.

I don't believe you've thought this through any more than the average Aminian has thought his beliefs through.

See my post above.
 
Upvote 0

MDC

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2017
1,127
511
48
Texas
✟59,701.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
While I am generally of the Reformed (or some would say “Calvinist”) camp – I agree with this post --- even though I'm sure that some Calvinists would call it “Arminian”.

I like this sentiment because it is spot on. We are not Calvinists, Arminians, or even “Gill-ites” as it were.

We are simply students of the Bible who find the thoughts of certain theologians useful in expressing our own thoughts on the meaning of scripture.

Surely – as “Berean” minded disciples – we should feel free to agree with some of the thoughts of any given theologian and disagree just as freely. We do not blindly follow theologians without weighing each point - be they John Calvin, John Gill or the Pope of Rome.

While I believe that Gill has much to offer concerning understanding the doctrines of grace – I believe he is wrong on this point. It seems that he too has a tendency to sometimes simply follow the party line when it comes to theology.

While I agree with those who point out that “all” does not always mean “all” – the doctrine of the atonement is a place where it means exactly that IMO.

Christ did indeed die for the sins of the elect. But He also died for those He would pass by as well.

All of us here are elect. I would hope that we all could at least agree on that. As such – Christ died for our sins some 2000 years ago.

Even so – we were all enemies of God until justified through faith.

“Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior.”

“And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.”

“Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”

“And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled.”

“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:”

“There is none that understands, there is none that seeks after God.”

“They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.”

“God is angry with the wicked every day.“

I received justification when I was 13 years of age. Paul was perhaps around 30 when he was saved. The thief on the cross was likely lost up until the very day he died. Ted Bundy was 42 when he was saved. Chuck Colson was 41 years old when he was justified before God. Many have received Christ at over 100 years of age on their deathbed.

All of us are part of the “elect” of God for whom Christ died. And yet we were as lost and as alienated from God as Adolf Hitler and Judas Iscariot up until the day we were saved by grace through faith.

Who is to say that a person could remain an enemy of God and a "child of wrath" for 13 or 100 years and not for eternity?

The life of every believer stands as a stark testimony of the illogical assumptions of those who teach a limited atonement.

God “reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” 2 cor. 5:18-21

People who believe in the doctrines of grace need to reject limited atonement. Christ died for the sins of the world and everyone in the world will still remain an enemy of God and under His wrath until the day they are justified through faith. That day may never come in this life and therefore they will remain God’s enemy throughout eternity in spite of Christ dying for their sins.

John Gill is a fine theologian. But then so was John Calvin.

I’m with Calvin on this one. If this means to some that John Calvin and I can't be called Calvinists- so be it. Calvin and I will gladly accept that. Calvin didn't follow anyone but the Lord and neither do I.

A FEW QUOTES BY JOHN CALVIN:

1 John 2:2--"he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world"----------------------- "CHRIST SUFFERED FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD. and in the goodness of God is OFFERED UNTO ALL MEN WITHOUT DISTINCTION, HIS BLOOD BEING SHED NOT FOR A PART OF THE WORLD ONLY, BUT FOR THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE; for although in the world nothing is found worthy of the favor of God, yet he HOLDS OUT THE PROPITIATION TO THE WHOLE WORLD, since without exception he SUMMONS ALL TO THE FAITH OF CHRIST, which is nothing else than the door unto hope."

Mark 14:24: "This is my blood of the new testament, WHICH IS SHED FOR MANY"..................... "The word 'many' DOES NOT MEAN A PART OF THE WORLD ONLY, BUT THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE: he contrasts many with one as if to say that he would not be the Redeemer of one man, but would meet death to deliver many of their cursed guilt. No doubt that in speaking to a few Christ wished to make His teaching available to a larger number...So when we come to the holy table not only should the general idea come to our mind that THE WORLD IS REDEEMED BY THE BLOOD OF CHRIST but also each should reckon to himself that his own sins are covered.

Romans 5:18: "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."
"Paul makes grace COMMON TO ALL MEN, not because it in fact EXTENDS TO ALL, but because IT IS OFFERED TO ALL. Although CHRIST SUFFERED FOR THE SINS OF THE WORLD. AND IS OFFERED BY THE GOODNESS OF GOD WITHOUT DISTINCTION TO ALL MEN, yet not all receive him"

Calvin's "LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT, April 25, 1564":
"I testify also and declare, that I suppliantly beg of Him, that He may be pleased so to was and purify me in the blood which my Sovereign Redeemer HAS SHED FOR THE SINS OF THE HUMAN RACE, that under His shadow I may be able to stand at the judgment-seat....

Mark 14:24 passage:
COMMENTARY ON A HARMONY OF THE EVANGELISTS, MATTHEW, MARK, AND LUKE, BY JOHN CALVIN
TRANSLATED FROM THE ORIGINAL LATIN, AND COLLATED WITH THE AUTHOR'S FRENCH VERSION, VOLUME THIRD BY THE REV. WILLIAM PRINGLE
CHRISTIAN CLASSICS ETHEREAL LIBRARY -- GRAND RAPIDS, MI

Romans 5:18 passage:
COMMENTARIES ON THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS
BY JOHN CALVIN
TRANSLATED AND EDITED BY THE REV. JOHN OWEN, VICAR OF THRUSSINGTON, LEICESTERSHIRE
CHRISTIAN CLASSICS ETHEREAL LIBRARY GRAND RAPIDS, MI

Concerning Calvin’s will:
History of the Christian Church, Volume VIII: Modern Christianity. “The Swiss Reformation”
§ 165. Calvin’s Last Will, and Farewells.
This is the kind of attitude which gives Calvinism a bad name IMO.

I don't believe you've thought this through any more than the average Aminian has thought his beliefs through.

See my post above.
The inconsistency and illogical opinion you've formed, is what causes your beliefs to be compromising and confusing. The truth of the gospel is never acceptable to the self righteous pelagian
 
Upvote 0

MDC

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2017
1,127
511
48
Texas
✟59,701.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
This is the kind of attitude which gives Calvinism a bad name IMO.

I don't believe you've thought this through any more than the average Aminian has thought his beliefs through.

See my post above.
Does the OP and it's poster give Arminianism a bad name too? Was that post not just as harsh against so called "Calvinism"? Or are you just contentious with me because universal atonement places no value on the redemptive work of Christ? Amyraldians haven't thought through their inconsistent beliefs. And is why Amyraldianism is nothing more than a smoke screen to hide their true arminian beliefs
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The inconsistency and illogical opinion you've formed, is what causes your beliefs to be compromising and confusing. The truth of the gospel is never acceptable to the self righteous pelagian
My opinion is very logical. Please show me where it isn't.

As a believer in total depravity, unconditional election, irresistible grace and the eternal security of the believer I don't understand your charge of pelagianism toward me.

Please explain. Thanks!
Does the OP and it's poster give Arminianism a bad name too? Was that post not just as harsh against so called "Calvinism"?
Yes - exactly as I said to him.
Or are you just contentious with me because universal atonement places no value on the redemptive work of Christ?
The Savior shedding His blood for the sins of the entire world places no value on the redemptive work of Christ?

That's exactly the kind of charge that give Calvinism a bad name. But then - I'm repeating myself again, aren't I?

Whatever you consider the redemptive work of Christ at Calvary to be exactly - it has no value whatsoever for any man who ever lived in and of itself and apart from saving faith.
Amyraldians haven't thought through their inconsistent beliefs. A
I never met Moses Amyraut and even if I had I wouldn't call myself by his name any more than I would call myself by the name of John Calvin.

I know it's hard for you to break out of the party-line box and think for yourself. But give it a try. You might like it. More importantly God might like it just as He liked what the Bereans did.
And is why Amyraldianism is nothing more than a smoke screen to hide their true arminian beliefs
You are pretty big on labels aren't you? What's wrong with studying the scriptures for ourselves and just calling ourselves Bible believing Christians?

Do you also charge John Calvin with Amyraldism?

Or did you even read the quotes from Calvin which I provided for you?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

MDC

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2017
1,127
511
48
Texas
✟59,701.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
My opinion is very logical. Please show me where it isn't.

As a believer in total depravity, unconditional election, irresistible grace and the eternal security of the believer I don't understand your charge of pelagianism toward me.

Please explain. Thanks!

Yes - exactly as I said to him.

Universal atonement places no value on the redemptive work of Christ?

That's exactly the kind of charge that give Calvinism a bad name. But then - I'm repeating myself again, aren't I?

I never me Moses Amyraut and even if I had I wouldn't call myself by his name any more than I would call myself by the name of John Calvin.

I know it's hard for you to break out of the party line box and think for yourself. But give it a try. You might like it. More importantly God might like it just as He liked what the Berean Christians did.

You are pretty big on labels aren't you? What's wrong with just studying the scriptures for ourselves and just calling ourselves Bible believing Christians?

Do you also charge John Calvin with Amyraldism?

Or did you even read the quotes from Calvin which I provided for you?
Like I said this thread was started to cause contention. And yes your Amyraldian beliefs are very illogical. Just think and study a bit.. it may come to you by Gods grace. If not then continue to fog this forum with Amyraldianism, which is nothing more than arminian Romanism in disguise
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Like I said this thread was started to cause contention. And yes your Amyraldian beliefs are very illogical. Just think and study a bit.. it may come to you by Gods grace. If not then continue to fog this forum with Amyraldianism, which is nothing more than arminian Romanism in disguise
Pelagianism and now Romanism? How so?

You and others who believe that the atonement was limited give lip service to the great value of Christ's sacrifice. You try to cover your bases by saying that the atonement was of infinite worth.

But then you treat it as if it was only of enough worth to pay for the sins of some men.

You treat the shedding of the blood of God incarnate as if it was something like, "One drop = one sin and one stripe = one sin. Therefore X number of drops and X number of stripes only covers X number of sins.

That seems to me to be a rather shallow view of the worth of the blood of the Son of God not to mention the eternal purpose for which it was shed.

The truth is that the so called "Arminian" view is the view which places infinite value on the sacrifice of Christ and not the simplistic view of the illogical 5-point Calvinists which limits it's value.

The Biblical truth is that the value of Christ's sacrifice was infinite and that it was able to reconcile the entire world to God not counting their sins against them - just as it did according to the scriptures.

What is necessary now is that men be reconciled to God through faith. Until then the sacrifice of Christ is of absolutely no value to anyone. Whether a person be elect or reprobate - their condition before God is the same until the exercise that saving faith.

Whether or not there is a special group of individuals who are drawn to Christ because of the election of God (and there is) is of no import. It does nothing to refute the Biblical fact that the sacrifice of Christ reconciled the entire world to God.

The important question for each and every man in the world is whether they will be found so reconciled to God in His wrath against the Lamb of God or so reconciled to God in His glorification of the Lamb of God.

While the OP may have had a contentious element to it. Your posts have out striped it on every level.

Do you have any arguments against my presentation or the presentation of John Calvin which I provided?

Or will we have to end this with you simply calling names and hiding your head in a T.U.L.I.P.?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

MDC

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2017
1,127
511
48
Texas
✟59,701.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Pelagianism and now Romanism? How so?

You and others who believe that the atonement was limited give lip service to the great value of Christ's sacrifice. You try to cover your bases by saying that the atonement was of infinite worth.

But then you treat it as if it was only of enough worth to pay for the sins of some men.

You treat the shedding of the blood of God incarnate as if it was something like, "One drop = one sin and one stripe = one sin. Therefore X number of drops and X number of stripes only covers X number of sins.

That seems to me to be a rather shallow view of the worth of the blood of the Son of God not to mention the eternal purpose for which it was shed.

The truth is that the so called "Arminian" view is the view which places infinite value on the sacrifice of Christ and not the simplistic view of the illogical 5-point Calvinists which limits it's value.

The Biblical truth is that the value of Christ's sacrifice was infinite and that it was able to reconcile the entire world to God not counting their sins against them - just as it did according to the scriptures.

What is necessary now is that men be reconciled to God through faith. Until then the sacrifice of Christ is of absolutely no value to anyone. Whether a person be elect or reprobate - their condition before God is the same until the exercise that saving faith.

Whether or not there is a special group of individuals who are drawn to Christ because of the election of God (and there is) is of no import. It does nothing to refute the Biblical fact that the sacrifice of Christ reconciled the entire world to God.

The important question for each and every man in the world is whether they will be found so reconciled to God in His wrath against the Lamb of God or so reconciled to God in His glorification of the Lamb of God.

While the OP may have had a contentious element to it. Your posts have out striped it on every level.

Do you have any arguments against my presentation or the presentation of John Calvin which I provided?

Or will we have to end this with you simply calling names and hiding your head in a T.U.L.I.P.?
The pretentious attitude of not knowing the arguments and refutation of unlimited atonement, is a characteristic of many on this forum. It's so hypocritical and lacks honesty. A false humility that is evident in your post. I know you're fully aware of my arguments if I should give any. So why even ask? And why I said this thread was started to be contentious. You are without excuse to hold to such inconsistencies.. being that you are fully aware of the truth according to scripture that refutes unlimited atonement. I'm not gonna play your game. This is only a smoke screen to hide hatred for the gospel of grace... and a diversion from how illogical Amyraldians deny T.U.L.I.P altogether
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The pretentious attitude of not knowing the arguments and refutation of unlimited atonement, is a characteristic of many on this forum. It's so hypocritical and lacks honesty. A false humility that is evident in your post. I know you're fully aware of my arguments if I should give any. So why even ask? And why I said this thread was started to be contentious. You are without excuse to hold to such inconsistencies.. being that you are fully aware of the truth according to scripture that refutes unlimited atonement. I'm not gonna play your game. This is only a smoke screen to hide hatred for the gospel of grace... and a diversion from how illogical Amyraldians deny T.U.L.I.P altogether
Are you in all seriousness charging John Calvin (who held the exact position I do on this) with being a Pelagian Romanist who hid his Arminianism under the cloak of Amyraldianism - which was only a smoke screen to hide his hatred for the gospel of grace?

Do you understand exactly how ridiculous those charges are?

I have asked you to reply directly to what I in particular have said about the subject and I have also asked you to reply directly to what Calvin has said about the subject.

If that, in your view, is too much to ask in a civil discussion then so be it.

Two questions follow for you in answer concerning your charges against me.

How is my position like Roman Catholicism?

How is my position Pelagian?

If you just want to hurl insults and not answer - that will be it for us.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
While I believe that Gill has much to offer concerning understanding the doctrines of grace – I believe he is wrong on this point. It seems that he too has a tendency to sometimes simply follow the party line when it comes to theology.

While I agree with those who point out that “all” does not always mean “all” – the doctrine of the atonement is a place where it means exactly that IMO.

Christ did indeed die for the sins of the elect. But He also died for those He would pass by as well.

All of us here are elect. I would hope that we all could at least agree on that. As such – Christ died for our sins some 2000 years ago.

Even so – we were all enemies of God until justified through faith.

“Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior.”

“And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.”

“Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”

“And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled.”

“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:”

“There is none that understands, there is none that seeks after God.”

“They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.”

“God is angry with the wicked every day.“

I received justification when I was 13 years of age. Paul was perhaps around 30 when he was saved. The thief on the cross was likely lost up until the very day he died. Ted Bundy was 42 when he was saved. Chuck Colson was 41 years old when he was justified before God. Many have received Christ at over 100 years of age on their deathbed.

All of us are part of the “elect” of God for whom Christ died. And yet we were as lost and as alienated from God as Adolf Hitler and Judas Iscariot up until the day we were saved by grace through faith.

Who is to say that a person could remain an enemy of God and a "child of wrath" for 13 or 100 years and not for eternity?

The life of every believer stands as a stark testimony of the illogical assumptions of those who teach a limited atonement.

God “reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” 2 cor. 5:18-21

People who believe in the doctrines of grace need to reject limited atonement. Christ died for the sins of the world and everyone in the world will still remain an enemy of God and under His wrath until the day they are justified through faith. That day may never come in this life and therefore they will remain God’s enemy throughout eternity in spite of Christ dying for their sins.

John Gill is a fine theologian. But then so was John Calvin.

I’m with Calvin on this one. If this means to some that John Calvin and I can't be called Calvinists- so be it. Calvin and I will gladly accept that. Calvin didn't follow anyone but the Lord and neither do I.

I like John Gill, I have used his commentary quite extensively, and have found only a very times, where I disagree with him.

John Gill has in fact been accused of "Hyper-Calvinism".

But I still like him none-the-less.

First off, let me very LOUD and Clear, Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God did pay the penalty for sin. His atonement, was indeed "unlimited" in its offer, but it is certainly "limited" as to whom it is effectual.

Many people here want desperately to over emphasize that Christ's death on the cross was all mankind. And it certainly was. But...

What does the word ransom mean?

"The root word is luo {loo'-o} translated in other places as to loose 27, break 5, destroy 2, dissolve 2, put off 1, melt 1, break up 1, break down It speaks of loosing any person (or thing) tied or fastened down ie- a) bandages of the feet, or the shoes,

It certainly refers to loosing one bound, i.e. to unbind, release from bonds, set free

one bound with chains (a prisoner), discharge from prison, to let go.

A ransom is the price paid for the redemption and deliverance of someone who has been taken hostage.

The Greek word used in our text is ANTILUTRON... AV - ransom it is the only time this form of the word is used in the NT. 1) the price for redeeming, price paid for slaves, captives In this case it refers to the price paid to liberate many from misery and the penalty of their sins.

It is a very emphatic word ... it means "a corresponding price" not just a price being paid, but the appropriate price was paid.

It conveys that a just price was exacted... there was not an unfairly high price paid for things he did not receive... it has happened to you- you have paid a price for something and when you have got home you have discovered that what the box or advertisement promised was more glamorous than the thing actually purchased. Christ’s payment was not of such a nature! It was appropriate."

Source

So...ask yourself this, what did Christ "ransom" us from?

Now some people will something along this line:

""the Bible plainly teaches that Christ’s death and His work of redemption was not only sufficient for the entire world, but that He actually died for the sins of all the world." They will back their position with this verse from 1 John 2:2 - "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." ...as well as John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." (And leave it there as if this settles the argument)."

Source

And the author also provides this answer:

"It is not quite apparent to me why the text of John 3:16 should be an argument against limited atonement. The passage does not say Jesus died for everyone, but only that the Father gave his Son for ALL THOSE WHO WOULD BELIEVE. It says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES in HIM shall not perish but have eternal life." Right? Don't we all believe this? That is why the consistent biblical Calvinists, when presenting the gospel to unbelievers, simply teach that Christ died for "all who would believe", which is actually closer to the meaning of this text than the erroneous position that He died for all in a general kind of way, and yet for no individual in particular. Instead, we believe that the benefits of the atonement will apply only to who will be believers, so he did not die for any person who would remain steadfast in their unbelief. So I would argue that John 3:16 actually supports the definite atonement position better than the indefinite position. They are reading into the text that Christ's death only potentially will save someone if they believe without the help and grace of the cross to do so. So in actuality, Christ died for no one in particular this scheme. His affection was only cast forth in a general impersonal kind of way rather then actually coming for His people who He set his affection on from eternity."

Ibid

(Which here, this agrees completely with what John Gill said)

"And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." -Acts 13:48 (KJV)

Who knows the number of people who turned out to here the preaching? And who knows the number which actually believed? But one thing is certain, those and only those "ordained to eternal life believed".

We also have to ask the question: "What sins did Christ die for?"

The usual answer would be for all sins. The sins of the entire world. (cf. 1 Jn. 2:2)

But there is a hole in this argument.

Did Jesus die for the sin of "unbelief"? If so, then why do people still die and go to hell?

The article I quoted from actually answers that question as well:

"At first glance I must admit that this appears to be a pretty good text to back up their argument but upon closer examination, it falls apart. The problem is that if the four-pointers read this verse the way they intend to then we must also conclude that the whole world's sins have already been atoned for (believers and unbelievers) and thus all will be saved (universalism). If Christ is a propitiation or atonement for all men's sins, paying for all sins ever committed, then why isn't everyone in the whole world saved???? So the verse actually proves to much. The verse simply means, (and there is no doubt this is what Paul meant), Christ did not die for every person without exception but every person without distinction. . All kinds of people everywhere, is what is meant. We see this elsewhere when the Scriptures say, Christ "purchased for God with [His] blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation." (Revelation 5:9). Many will argue that He didn't die for our unbelief, which I believe I thoroughly discredited in my argument above. John is speaking, rather, of sins for people throughout the whole world, not each and every person's sins. There are too many problems with saying that the text includes all men (believers and unbelievers) and, as I have shown, this leads to an unbiblical universalism. Saying Christ died for the sins of the whole world is similar in the use of language in many other passages in Scripture such as Mark 1:5 which says, "And all the country of Judea was going out to him, and all the people of Jerusalem." If you think the "all in this passage means every single person without exception, you have missed the point, it means large numbers of people; all persons without distinction, but not all persons without exception.

Christ died for all of the sins of His elect, including their previous sin of unbelief. Belief in the Gospel does not make up for our previous sin of unbelief. Belief (faith) is the witness that God has already wrought grace in our hearts, the inevitable response to His work of regeneration in our souls. (John 3:21) Christ clearly came to lay down His life for His sheep (John 10:11) and some people are not his sheep: "...but you do not believe because you are not my sheep." (John 10:26) Jesus prayed for His own but he would not pray for those the Father had NOT given him: "I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours." Emphasis mine (John 17:9)."

Source

And I also add:

"If Christ died for every man then he did so conditionally or absolutely.

If absolutely then every man is saved whatever he does and thinks of God. He need never think of God , want God, care of how much he has offended God, he is going to heaven even if he dies in a drunken stupor having choked on his own vomit in a brothel with a blood stained knife in his hand and a warrant out for his arrest for drug dealing to 10 year olds... it matters not... he is going to heaven... for Christ has paid the price... there is nothing justify for him to do.

If conditionally we ask what is that condition?

You may say "faith in Christ"- but it is clear that no man can perform or conjure up "faith" in Christ... sinners are dead in trespasses and sins.. they can no more believe upon Christ than a dead man can believe that there is a way for him to be made alive again. Faith is "a gift of God"- "By grace are you saved through faith and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God."

Anyway is it a sin or is it not a sin to fail to believe in God... surely faithlessness is a sinful condition... if so why did the death of Christ not cover it? Surely Christ’s death if it was for all men’s sins covered the sin of not believing God.

If you say Salvation is provided for every man providing he will take it- you are asking for a greater thing than the one who would offer a blind man $1000 providing he can see it first.... or assuring a dead man that great rewards await him providing he can first raise himself from the dead.

So if he died for all without condition then all are saved! Or If he died for all upon the condition they believe.. none are saved, for the dead soul cannot believe of it’s self.

Therefore, we conclude, he died for some men absolutely and purchased a full and perfect salvation for them so all will be saved for whom he died! His death won for all of His people the graces of conversion of the will, repentance from sin, faith towards God... He purchased full and complete salvation for His people!"

Source

So which is the glorifying doctrine?

Unlimited atonement, or Limited Atonement?

Its actually funny that people use John 3:16 as an argument against "limited atonement".

Because while the offer is open to "whosoever will" is an established fact that not everybody is included in "whosoever will". And one may say that those who use Jn. 3:16 as an argument for unlimited atonement, they are actually making an argument for limited atonement.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

shakewell

Active Member
Jun 17, 2013
310
56
✟40,638.00
Faith
Christian
So the debt and penalty for sin was paid for by Christ Jesus for all humanity, including those who will spend eternity in the lake of fire? Have you seriously thought about what you are saying?? Obviously there is no clue to what a ransom is and what it truly means. The whole meaning behind ransom is completely nullified by this deceptive twisting. What are they suffering in hell for then? ".. for He shall save His people from their sins.." Mathew 1:21. It's very evident that those who hold to this pelagian view are blinded from the truth of the gospel. And haven't been given eyes to see and a heart to believe. And gives more proof that there is absolutely no belief in the gospel of Christ to save them. This topic, and others relating to the doctrines of grace, goes round and round on this forum. And all it does is bring contentious bickering by the puffed up blind, who seek to justify their humanistic works righteousness by pulling certain scriptures and isolating them apart from its proper context. The pride of man will always hate that salvation is completely by Gods Sovereign grace and mercy, conditioned solely in Christ and His redemptive work... The elect will always believe and rest in this truth. The OP proves the motives behind starting this thread to begin with... to be contentious
It says "... Who gave himself a ransom for all ...". It doesn't say all were ransomed.
Because there is wrath, beware lest he take thee away with his stroke: then a great ransom cannot deliver thee. Job 36:18
 
Upvote 0

shakewell

Active Member
Jun 17, 2013
310
56
✟40,638.00
Faith
Christian
It conveys that a just price was exacted... there was not an unfairly high price paid for things he did not receive... it has happened to you- you have paid a price for something and when you have got home you have discovered that what the box or advertisement promised was more glamorous than the thing actually purchased. Christ’s payment was not of such a nature! It was appropriate."
Jesus paid a price so that every individual man can be saved, the majority of whom don't get saved. I think the faithful Creator got exactly what He paid for.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Jesus paid a price so that every individual man can be saved, the majority of whom don't get saved. I think the faithful Creator got exactly what He paid for.

You are right, but so am I.

The debt He paid, the ransom He paid, is for every person, but it is limited in that only the elect will accept and believe (Efficacious(Irresitable) Grace).

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

shakewell

Active Member
Jun 17, 2013
310
56
✟40,638.00
Faith
Christian
You are right, but so am I.

The debt He paid, the ransom He paid, is for every person, but it is limited in that only the elect will accept and believe (Efficacious(Irresitable) Grace).

God Bless

Till all are one.
Then how is the ransom "for" the persons who are not among this elect you refer to? The passage says it's for them too.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Then how is the ransom "for" the persons who are not among this elect you refer to? The passage says it's for them too.

"E- "WHO ARE THE RANSOMED?"

This is the question that will take up most of our time. Some will turn to the text before us and say "It is plainly taught in the Scriptures that the ransomed are "all!" Is that not what this says?"

Well of course the text and some other places says it but does it mean "each and every man that has ever lived" or does it mean "each and every created being- angels included" or does it mean "Some of every type and class of mankind?"

The first thing we should realize is that "all" (used well over 1,000 times in the NT) does not always... in fact relatively rarely does it mean "each and every man." John Owen having studied this thoroughly asserts that only in 1 out of every 10 cases is the meaning "all of all sorts"

Turn to MAT 3:5 Referring to John the Baptists activities we are told "Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, And were baptised of him in Jordan, confessing their sins."

Does this mean that each and every person in Judea and Jerusalem and in all the area lined up to get baptised? Well if you continue to read on you find John had many enemies in Jerusalem.... it is clear the Holy Spirit is saying that there were " sorts of people coming from these areas" not every single person.

Turn to ACT 2:17 Peter here quotes the Prophet Joel and he says that this is the day of which the prophet spoke- "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams."

"all flesh" does that mean each and every man, woman and child on the day of Pentecost had the Holy Spirit poured upon them? No... what then does it mean? Turn to ACT 2:5 this explains who was there that day "There were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven"

It is plain to see that the wide sweeping "all" means not every single person... but some from every place. Oftentimes when this word is used esp. in the OT prophecies it relates to the widening of the net of the New Covenant to include the Gentiles... expressions like "all nations, all flesh, all the ends of the earth.." they must be seen as they are intended, to speak of some of all sorts, types, colors; some rich, poor, some rulers and some servants.

What is it that redeems and saves the soul? It is the Ransom Price... if therefore the ransom price is paid for all men, every individual ... then legally they are cleared- what is owed is paid and all are saved.

Having established that "all" means more than "every single one"- we should now consider our text in it’s context. What does it mean in 1 TIM 2:6 when it says Christ "gave Himself a ransom for all?"

What about verse 4..!!" "Who will have all men to be saved." Well- since we are told in DAN 4:35 that God "doeth his will in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say what doest thou?"

If verse 4 means it is God’s will that each and every man will be saved we have to conclude that it is what will happen. This means that should a man continue on in his sin never repenting...eating , drinking and being merry with no thought of God or his soul... that it matters not- he will be saved anyway.

However verse 4 is not speaking about every man... it is set in a context where the "men" referred to are clearly stated.

Verse 1- "I exhort therefore , that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks, be made for all men."

Here we have "all men" again- is Paul saying that Timothy should seek to name every individual in the world at the throne of grace? No. he explains in verse2- "For Kings, and for all that are in authority.."

Timothy was not to be unmindful of praying for those who were in positions of influence... it would have been easy to have excluded the ruling classes from his intercession, for not many were saved and the great many of them were enemies of the gospel and had begun opposing the truth and the Church in many places.

"But.." says Paul "..pray for every kind of man... it is God’s will that there will be some even from the high and lofty ranks of society who will be saved- pray for them that God might so move among them as to make our lot more peaceable and that some of them will come to faith in Christ."

There is no doubt in my mind that "all men" spoken of in this verse will be saved. God will have them come to the knowledge of the truth- to know the truth is to know the Lord Jesus Christ, and to know eternal life.

"all men" in verse 4 and "all" in verse 6 (our text) are all sorts of men- God wills that every kind of man be saved and therefore Christ died for every type of man.

Look around you today- this congregation is a testimony to this- there are white, yellow, black, and brown faces... go out into the car lot and see some gleaming smart cars and some being held together by tape....there are rich and poor here today... listen to the testimonies of the people here... some raised in Christian homes, having heard the gospel since they were knee high to a grasshopper! some never knowing what is was to hear the gospel until God providentially brought them face to face with a Christian work mate or neighbor!

It is the will of God that some of all sorts of men be saved! Praise God! It means that should we because of prejudice stop praying for Bill Clinton- we sin... for who knows God may yet be pleased to save him!! If some of you refuse to pray for the Governor of CA- you sin... for God who knows all about His personal life and political decisions may yet be pleased to save Him.

The hatred of many towards this doctrine was underlined for me a few weeks back... A woman phoned- she was keen to ask a question.. she had heard through the grapevine that I did not believe that the death of Christ was for each and every person, she could not believe that someone who preached the Bible could hold to such a thing and she was doing the right thing and phoning me to give me the opportunity to clear it up... she was horrified and I believe genuinely disgusted as I sought to explain God’s sovereign plan of salvation.

It was to John 3:16 that she appealed repeatedly... when I turned her attention to other passages she kept coming back to John 3:16... I asked her how it taught a universal atonement ... and she repeatedly told me it was so clear she needn’t explain it!

Yet on occasions in the scripture "world" refers to people from different races- not all people in all places.. turn to ROM 1:8.. Paul is greeting the Church at Rome... and as he does so he commends them for their faithful and consistent testimony... he says "First I thank my God through Jesus Christ, for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world."

Do you think that the Native Americans who were roaming the plains of the North American continent were talking about the faith of the Roman Christians? Do you think Paul is meaning that the Pictish race who lived in pagan darkness in the land now known as Scotland were aware of the faith of the Church at Rome?

Is this what Paul is meaning... for if so he is well out of order... not every single person was speaking of their faith- but what he does mean is that all over the then known world... esp. the Roman empire there were different groups who knew of God’s dealings at Rome and were encouraged by it! What is my point? "world" does not always mean every single human being. When Christ is called "Savior of the World"- he either is actually the one who saves fully every man or he is the one who saves people from every tribe, kindred and tongue!

When we read "God loved the world>" we understand either that he loved every single person ever to be born... if so his love was weak and empty towards them... for there have been billions who have died "without God and without hope!" Untold millions have perished without ever having the opportunity to hear the message of grace.

OR

We can understand that God has His elect in every land, from every people, and that he loved them, and so that all believers would not perish he sent his son to die that they might have everlasting life.

If this understanding of John 3:16 is blowing your mind.... then I submit to you that all of orthodox evangelical Christendom held to it until some 150 years ago.

Bullinger points out that this refers to "world without distinction as opposed to Israel without exception."

However just as "all men" rarely means "every single person" so "world" rarely means "every single person" -

God desires to take some of all kinds from the varied tapestry of humanity and unite them to His son and to one another as brothers and sisters in Christ.

He never tells us he sent His son to die for every man every where... for since every man is not and will not be saved that would imply Christ paid their ransom price but in vain! John Owen put it so well "Did Christ die for all of the sins of all men- Did He die for all of the sins of some men- Or did he die for some of the sins of all men?"

He then comments "If the last be true then all men have some sins to answer for and no man can be saved. If the first be true then why are all men not saved and freed from the grip and punishment of sin? You answer "because of unbelief!" I ask is this unbelief not a sin? If it be a sin then why must that hinder a man more than any other sin for which Christ died? We are therefore shut up to the second conclusion which is the proposition we lay down as truth.. (Christ died for all of the sins of some men)..."


Source

That should answer you question of "all".

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

shakewell

Active Member
Jun 17, 2013
310
56
✟40,638.00
Faith
Christian
"E- "WHO ARE THE RANSOMED?"

This is the question that will take up most of our time. Some will turn to the text before us and say "It is plainly taught in the Scriptures that the ransomed are "all!" Is that not what this says?"

Well of course the text and some other places says it but does it mean "each and every man that has ever lived" or does it mean "each and every created being- angels included" or does it mean "Some of every type and class of mankind?"

The first thing we should realize is that "all" (used well over 1,000 times in the NT) does not always... in fact relatively rarely does it mean "each and every man." John Owen having studied this thoroughly asserts that only in 1 out of every 10 cases is the meaning "all of all sorts"

Turn to MAT 3:5 Referring to John the Baptists activities we are told "Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, And were baptised of him in Jordan, confessing their sins."

Does this mean that each and every person in Judea and Jerusalem and in all the area lined up to get baptised? Well if you continue to read on you find John had many enemies in Jerusalem.... it is clear the Holy Spirit is saying that there were " sorts of people coming from these areas" not every single person.

Turn to ACT 2:17 Peter here quotes the Prophet Joel and he says that this is the day of which the prophet spoke- "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams."

"all flesh" does that mean each and every man, woman and child on the day of Pentecost had the Holy Spirit poured upon them? No... what then does it mean? Turn to ACT 2:5 this explains who was there that day "There were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven"

It is plain to see that the wide sweeping "all" means not every single person... but some from every place. Oftentimes when this word is used esp. in the OT prophecies it relates to the widening of the net of the New Covenant to include the Gentiles... expressions like "all nations, all flesh, all the ends of the earth.." they must be seen as they are intended, to speak of some of all sorts, types, colors; some rich, poor, some rulers and some servants.

What is it that redeems and saves the soul? It is the Ransom Price... if therefore the ransom price is paid for all men, every individual ... then legally they are cleared- what is owed is paid and all are saved.

Having established that "all" means more than "every single one"- we should now consider our text in it’s context. What does it mean in 1 TIM 2:6 when it says Christ "gave Himself a ransom for all?"

What about verse 4..!!" "Who will have all men to be saved." Well- since we are told in DAN 4:35 that God "doeth his will in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say what doest thou?"

If verse 4 means it is God’s will that each and every man will be saved we have to conclude that it is what will happen. This means that should a man continue on in his sin never repenting...eating , drinking and being merry with no thought of God or his soul... that it matters not- he will be saved anyway.

However verse 4 is not speaking about every man... it is set in a context where the "men" referred to are clearly stated.

Verse 1- "I exhort therefore , that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks, be made for all men."

Here we have "all men" again- is Paul saying that Timothy should seek to name every individual in the world at the throne of grace? No. he explains in verse2- "For Kings, and for all that are in authority.."

Timothy was not to be unmindful of praying for those who were in positions of influence... it would have been easy to have excluded the ruling classes from his intercession, for not many were saved and the great many of them were enemies of the gospel and had begun opposing the truth and the Church in many places.

"But.." says Paul "..pray for every kind of man... it is God’s will that there will be some even from the high and lofty ranks of society who will be saved- pray for them that God might so move among them as to make our lot more peaceable and that some of them will come to faith in Christ."

There is no doubt in my mind that "all men" spoken of in this verse will be saved. God will have them come to the knowledge of the truth- to know the truth is to know the Lord Jesus Christ, and to know eternal life.

"all men" in verse 4 and "all" in verse 6 (our text) are all sorts of men- God wills that every kind of man be saved and therefore Christ died for every type of man.

Look around you today- this congregation is a testimony to this- there are white, yellow, black, and brown faces... go out into the car lot and see some gleaming smart cars and some being held together by tape....there are rich and poor here today... listen to the testimonies of the people here... some raised in Christian homes, having heard the gospel since they were knee high to a grasshopper! some never knowing what is was to hear the gospel until God providentially brought them face to face with a Christian work mate or neighbor!

It is the will of God that some of all sorts of men be saved! Praise God! It means that should we because of prejudice stop praying for Bill Clinton- we sin... for who knows God may yet be pleased to save him!! If some of you refuse to pray for the Governor of CA- you sin... for God who knows all about His personal life and political decisions may yet be pleased to save Him.

The hatred of many towards this doctrine was underlined for me a few weeks back... A woman phoned- she was keen to ask a question.. she had heard through the grapevine that I did not believe that the death of Christ was for each and every person, she could not believe that someone who preached the Bible could hold to such a thing and she was doing the right thing and phoning me to give me the opportunity to clear it up... she was horrified and I believe genuinely disgusted as I sought to explain God’s sovereign plan of salvation.

It was to John 3:16 that she appealed repeatedly... when I turned her attention to other passages she kept coming back to John 3:16... I asked her how it taught a universal atonement ... and she repeatedly told me it was so clear she needn’t explain it!

Yet on occasions in the scripture "world" refers to people from different races- not all people in all places.. turn to ROM 1:8.. Paul is greeting the Church at Rome... and as he does so he commends them for their faithful and consistent testimony... he says "First I thank my God through Jesus Christ, for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world."

Do you think that the Native Americans who were roaming the plains of the North American continent were talking about the faith of the Roman Christians? Do you think Paul is meaning that the Pictish race who lived in pagan darkness in the land now known as Scotland were aware of the faith of the Church at Rome?

Is this what Paul is meaning... for if so he is well out of order... not every single person was speaking of their faith- but what he does mean is that all over the then known world... esp. the Roman empire there were different groups who knew of God’s dealings at Rome and were encouraged by it! What is my point? "world" does not always mean every single human being. When Christ is called "Savior of the World"- he either is actually the one who saves fully every man or he is the one who saves people from every tribe, kindred and tongue!

When we read "God loved the world>" we understand either that he loved every single person ever to be born... if so his love was weak and empty towards them... for there have been billions who have died "without God and without hope!" Untold millions have perished without ever having the opportunity to hear the message of grace.

OR

We can understand that God has His elect in every land, from every people, and that he loved them, and so that all believers would not perish he sent his son to die that they might have everlasting life.

If this understanding of John 3:16 is blowing your mind.... then I submit to you that all of orthodox evangelical Christendom held to it until some 150 years ago.

Bullinger points out that this refers to "world without distinction as opposed to Israel without exception."

However just as "all men" rarely means "every single person" so "world" rarely means "every single person" -

God desires to take some of all kinds from the varied tapestry of humanity and unite them to His son and to one another as brothers and sisters in Christ.

He never tells us he sent His son to die for every man every where... for since every man is not and will not be saved that would imply Christ paid their ransom price but in vain! John Owen put it so well "Did Christ die for all of the sins of all men- Did He die for all of the sins of some men- Or did he die for some of the sins of all men?"

He then comments "If the last be true then all men have some sins to answer for and no man can be saved. If the first be true then why are all men not saved and freed from the grip and punishment of sin? You answer "because of unbelief!" I ask is this unbelief not a sin? If it be a sin then why must that hinder a man more than any other sin for which Christ died? We are therefore shut up to the second conclusion which is the proposition we lay down as truth.. (Christ died for all of the sins of some men)..."


Source

That should answer you question of "all".

God Bless

Till all are one.

Your copy/paste contradicts what you said.
You said: "The debt He paid, the ransom He paid, is for every person, but ..."
This copy/paste says it isn't for every person.
My question "How is the ransom "for" every person?" applies to what you said but not to this article you pasted; because it's saying something entirely different.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Let me put it another way.

In Romans 11:26, Paul said:

"And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:"

If we take the words "all Israel" to mean just that, then just like some many evangelists, there is no need whatsoever to preach the gospel because all Israel will be saved.

But Paul also earlier that not all Israel is Israel. (cf Rom. 9:6)

So, does the word "all" here mean each and every Israelite, or does it mean that all who have been saved and "ingrafted" are "all Israel"?

We, Gentiles, by way of adoption and faith, have become the seed of Abraham. (cf. Gal. 3:7,9,14,29)

now, like I said earlier, I provided scripture from the Gospels that say He gave His life as a ransom for many. (cf. Mt. 20:28; Mk. 10:45)

So, does "all" always mean "all" i.e.: every single person who lived.

No.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0