Poll: Did Christ Die For All?

[CCWoody]

Woody,

Perhaps I should have made this a bit clearer - you have said that many is not all - but how do you know this? who are the many?

His people, His sheep;...

just exactly as we are told in the scriptures:

• And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins.~ Matthew 1 (from memory)
• "I am the Good Shepherd! The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep." ~ John 10 (from memory)

My apologies for citing scripture from memory. I'm lazy today and I trust that anyone who wishes can visit gospelcom or your favorite online resource.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[Road Runner]

I think that I may have agreed with you in the first place but gotten a bit confused along the way - What I intended to say was that Christ died that through Him our sins may be cleansed. This gift of salvation is open to all but not all choose to accept therefore there are many who will be saved. I initially thought that by many that you were talking about peeps of a specific denomination or country or something!

 

[Road Runner]

btw, if I understand it correct, His sheep are the people who choose to accept this gift of salvation - if this is what you mean, then yes, certainly I agree with you!

 

[TrinityHerself]

Sadly, it makes me want to vomit that some people believe that Jesus didn't die for all people. Not that I believe he died for anyone, cause I don't.

And what about the women?

 

[CCWoody]

I think that I may have agreed with you in the first place but gotten a bit confused along the way - What I intended to say was that Christ died that through Him our sins may be cleansed. This gift of salvation is open to all but not all choose to accept therefore there are many who will be saved. I initially thought that by many that you were talking about peeps of a specific denomination or country or something!

Actually, I believe much more about the nature of the Atonement than that. And I actually believe in a much more glorious Atonement than your typical Christian. I don't merely believe that when the Lord was murdered that it made it possible for me to be cleansed. I believe that it actually cleansed me and healed me:

• He bore our sins in His body. By His stripes we are healed. ~ 1 Peter 2 (paraphrase from memory)

He didn't merely make it possible. My sin actually hung on that cross. The stripes which struck Him actually healed me. There is absolutely nothing indefinite about what Peter means when he says WE ARE HEALED. There is no room for potentialiaties or possibilities. It is a declaration of FACT!

Now, I do believe that the free offer of the gospel is available to all. Any who thirst may take from the waters of life freely. There will not be any man who asks for the Blood of Christ only to have Him say "No!"

And, I do actually mean that the Lord did indeed die for a particular country. Actually Peter uses the word "nation":

• You are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation... ~ 1 Pe 2 (from memory)

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[CCWoody]

btw, if I understand it correct, His sheep are the people who choose to accept this gift of salvation - if this is what you mean, then yes, certainly I agree with you!

Nope! This is not what I mean, nor what the scriptures teach.

People don't believe in order to turn into sheep. They believe because they already are sheep, just exactly as we are told:

• "But you don't believe, because you are not of my sheep, as I have told you ~ John 10:26 (from memory)

I never believed in order to secure the gift of salvation. I believe that the Lord has already secured my salvation. IOW, my believe is a consequence of my salvation and not the cause of receiving it.

Or, as the blessed Saint Augustine noted:

"But we say," say they, "that God did not foreknow anything as ours except that faith by which we begin to believe, and that He chose and predestinated us before the foundation of the world, in order that we might be holy and immaculate by His grace and by His work." But let them also hear in this testimony the words where he says, "We have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who worketh all things. He, therefore, worketh the beginning of our belief who worketh all things; because faith itself does not precede that calling of which it is said: "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;" and of which it is said: "Not of works, but of Him that calleth"; and the election which the Lord signified when He said: "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." For He chose us, not because we believed, but that we might believe, lest we should be said first to have chosen Him, and so His word be false (which be it far from us to think possible), "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." Neither are we called because we believed, but that we may believe; and by that calling which is without repentance it is effected and carried through that we should believe. But all the many things which we have said concerning this matter need not to be repeated.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[CCWoody]

Sadly, it makes me want to vomit that some people believe that Jesus didn't die for all people. Not that I believe he died for anyone, cause I don't.

And what about the women?

Whoa!, sister. If the doctrine of Limited Atonement makes you wanna hurl, just wait til I explain the doctrine of Reprobation! Better watch for yer toenails so you'll know when to shut 'er off.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[Reformationist]

There are plenty of clear-cut scripture verses that say that Christ died for "all", "our", "whole world", "every creation" etc.

Andrew, if I am standing at the ticket booth to a movie theater and I am with 10 of my friends and I say, "I'm paying for everyone's ticket" does that necessarily mean I'm going to pay for every single person who is in line to get a ticket? Of course not. I'm going to address these verses you list but Calvinists don't deny that "all" means "every single person" or that "whole world" doesn't mean "every single person." What we deny is that they always mean the same thing. Do you realize that there are numerous different ways in which the Greek word "kosmos" (world) is used? Sometimes it means "every single person." Sometimes it means "the physical earth." Sometimes it means "people from all nations." Sometimes it means "the entirity of the Jewish nation." Sometimes it means "the entirity of the heathen world." Sometimes it means "believers." The word "kosmos" is used in something like 10-12 different ways. How do you distinguish? It's called context. You have to consider the audience. You have to consider the timeframe. You have to consider the point that is being made.

Of cse, to the hyper Calvinists

Why do you keep using the term "hyper Calvinist" to describe those who believe in a limited atonement? Calvin believed and taught a limited atonement. You are obviously using it in a derrogatory sense and it is unnecessary. If you disagree with it that's fine but you need not denigrate those who do and it doesn't make us "hyper Calvinists." "Hyper Calvinism" is the term that is traditionally used to describe God's work in regeneration. Calvinists believe in an active-passive work by God. That is, God actively works, through His grace, in the heart of His elect to bring them to faith. He is passive in the hearts of those He has not ordained to bring to faith. That means that He "passes over" them and leaves them in a fallen state. He does not work "fresh evil" into their already fallen, rebellious heart. He doesn't need to. No man, apart from the efficacious grace of God, naturally seeks God. God does not need to keep someone from worshipping Him because, by nature, we don't worship Him. We rebel.

Of cse, to the hyper Calvinists, words like "all" and "every" means "some".

Do the words "all" or "world" or "every" in Scripture ever mean something other than "every single person who was ever created?" How about this one:

John 12:19
The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, "You see that you are accomplishing nothing. Look, the world has gone after Him!"

Does that mean that "everyone in the world" has gone after Christ?

But then I'd ask: So if the Bible says "all have sinned", does it mean some have sinned?)

Again this is an issue of trying to use the word "all" in one sense and apply it to every single instance of the word. It's fruitless and destructive to engage in such imprudent interpretation of the Gospel.

The Bible is also full of verses that say that ALL men have sinned. And that Christ came to die for sinners.

Yes, all people ever created have sinned. Yes, Christ came to die for sinners. No, He did not come to die for all people.

1Ti 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Christ came into the world to save sinners. That is true. Let me guess, by virtue of everyone being a sinner then that means that God sent His Son to save everyone, right? How's this analogy:

All dogs have tails.
Birds have tails.
Birds must be dogs.

It's the same thing as this:

Christ came to save sinners.
I am a sinner.
Christ came to save me.

As comforting as that last analogy may sound, the reasoning is unsound.

Hence, if all men have sinned, then Christ came to die for ALL men becos He came to die for sinners, which would imply all men becos all men have sinned, unless you believe only some men have sinned.

This is exactly the assumption that I was speaking of. You make a theological leap about the purpose of God based on your own crudely drawn conclusions. What, pray tell, was God's purpose in coming to die for sinners? Was it merely to provide the "possibility" of salvation or was it to actually accomplish salvation? How you answer that question will speak volumes about how you view the nature of God and His sovereign power over the creation of His divine hands. If you contend that God sent His Son to provide the "possibility" of salvation then you don't believe we are saved solely by the grace of God because you cannot attribute God's application of grace to an His divine pleasure but rather attribute it to something found in the recipient, which on it's own, makes it not grace but rather the wages of our own, inherent righteousness.

And it is interesting to note that when it comes to all men being sinners, the hyper Calvinist read "all" as "all" and do not believe that only "some" men have sinned. Or do they?

When you find a "hyper Calvinist" why don't you ask him/her to clarify the "hyper Calvinist" position.

Roms 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.

Is it your contention that every single person ever created has been proclaimed just by God? That's what that passage is referring to when it says "justification of life." You see, the issue isn't in whether each group is fully represented. It deals with WHO is represented. The punishment for the transgression of Adam is imputed to his progeny, being that Adam is the God appointed representative for all those who follow from his seed, which is every single person ever created by God. The imputation of the righteousness of Christ, whom God also appointed, is given to ALL whom Christ represents, which are all those whom the Father has called to faith in the Son (John 6:44).

Why should hyper Calvinists read the first "all" as "all" but the second "all" as "some" ie there is no consistency in interpretation of "all".

The reason has nothing to do with the group represented but rather with the representative. Christ does not represent those whom the Father has not called. He represents the sheep of God.

If Adams sin impacted the entire human race whereas Christ atonement is limited only to some, how can Christ's work be a "much more" in every sense of the phrase, as outlined in Roms 5? How can redemption be a greater work if its impact is not as far reaching as Adam's sin's impact?

Look at verse 15:

Romans 5:15
But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man's offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many.

Paul is spelling out a contrast between the roles fulfilled by Christ and Adam. Not only are the acts of the two men antithetical, but the grace of the work of Christ is seen to be greater than the sin, judgment, and condemnation of Adam in the way it brings justification, righteousness, and life to ruined souls.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Look at the last verse. It is hard to believe that "whole" does not mean "whole" but "some", and that "world" does not mean "the world" but "only some parts of the world".

It's important to note the audience. In verse one John addresses his audience as "my little children." John is telling his audience that Christ has not only propitiated for the sins of the immediate community or only the Jews but is valid anywhere in the world.

John 17:6-10
"I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. Now they have known that all things which You have given Me are from You. For I have given to them the words which You have given Me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me.
"I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. And all Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine, and I am glorified in them.

It doesn't get much clearer than this. Christ is clearly distinguishing between "the men whom You have given me out of the world" and "the world" for whom He does not pray.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Peace be with you.

Semantics aside, Jesus died to forgive all sins, past, present and future. But, I believe (Catholics teach) we must apply His death to benefit from His sacrifice (that may be confusing to non-Catholics, but this is probably not the place to discuss it).

God Bless and thanks for the poll!

So Christ's purpose in obedience unto death is to actually attain forgiveness for "all sins, past present and future" but He can only accomplish His divinely appointed goal if man cooperates? Is the Will and Purpose of God subject to man now?

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Christ died for all sinners that is to say he gives everyone chance to be saved.

So Christ isn't the actual Savior He's just the Provider of a "chance" at salvation?

Tell me Midge, what is the defining difference in those who do choose to be saved and those who don't? It can't be regenerative grace because, according to what you seem to be saying, all people get that. So what makes one person accept the Gospel in faith and another reject it? Is the difference in the measure of grace from God or is it to be found in the recipient of that grace? IOW, are we saved because of something found in us, i.e., because we choose to respond to the Gospel, or are we saved by the grace (UNMERITED FAVOR) of God?

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

There are many people in the world - that is, there is more than one, more than a few. All (of the many) may be saved through Christ's death on the cross

"May be" or "will be?" Does the Gospel say that God "may" accomplish the salvation of those He gives to the Son or that He "will?"

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

Does the Word say "all things may possibly work together for good to whose who love God? Are we called according to our natural, fallen response to the Gospel or "according to HIS PURPOSE?" Does the Word say that those "whom God foreknew He [/b]may[/b] predestine?" Does it say that those "whom He predestined He may call?" Does it say those "whom He called He may justify?" Does it say those "whom He justified He may glorify?"

The Gospel is the promise of God. It says those whom He foreknew He predestines. He does predestine them. Not may. Not might. He does. It says those whom He predestines He calls. He does call them. Those He called He justifies. He does justify them. Those whom He justifies He glorifies. Not might. Not may. He does.

If God "predestines" all people to be "conformed to the image of His Son" and, as many Christians claim, He gives the same call to all people then it would logically follow, according to Scripture that every single person would be foreknown, predestined, called, justified and glorified. Many evangelical Christians today will contend that we are all foreknown, predestined, called and justified but that quickly breaks down when we get to glorified because few Christians wish to be lumped with Universalists who include glorification into the assured gift given to all people.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

What I intended to say was that Christ died that through Him our sins may be cleansed.

Again with the "may."

Will Christ accomplish what He set out to do, which is to actually cleanse us from all unrighteousness, or is there a possibility that He will fail?

This gift of salvation is open to all but not all choose to accept therefore there are many who will be saved.

What does "open to all" mean? Does that mean that God just threw an offer of salvation out there on the table and those who are saved are actually saved because they made the decision to be saved?

One thing you should consider in this line of thinking is that if Christ, in His works of obedience unto death, merely provided the possibility of salvation then you have to also acknowledge the possibility that all people could have rejected His offer and then His death would have been for nothing.

If you are going to judge the efficacy of Christ's propitiation on the positive response you also have to acknowledge the ineffectiveness of Christ in accomplishing the salvation of those who negatively responded to the Gospel. If the divine purpose of the Godhead was to send the Son to save all people then the Godhead failed. In my opinion, it would be much better to acknowledge that God accomplishes exactly what He sets out to do and what He set out to do was not accomplish the salvation of the entire world, because then He would have failed, but rather that He set out to accomplish the salvation of all who will be saved and He is completely successful in His divine endeavor.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Sadly, it makes me want to vomit that some people believe that Jesus didn't die for all people. Not that I believe he died for anyone, cause I don't.

Who did He die for then, Himself? If His purpose in the incarnation wasn't to atone for someone's sins, however many you believe it to be, what was His purpose and why is it called "The Atonement" if He wasn't atoning for anything? You don't believe Christ sinned, do you?

And what about the women?

"All men" is not a reference to gender but rather inclusion in the created order of God. IOW, mankind, which includes women.

God bless

 

[Bastoune]

Or, as the blessed Saint Augustine noted:

"But we say," say they, "that God did not foreknow anything as ours except that faith by which we begin to believe, and that He chose and predestinated us before the foundation of the world, in order that we might be holy and immaculate by His grace and by His work." But let them also hear in this testimony the words where he says, "We have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who worketh all things. He, therefore, worketh the beginning of our belief who worketh all things; because faith itself does not precede that calling of which it is said: "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;" and of which it is said: "Not of works, but of Him that calleth"; and the election which the Lord signified when He said: "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." For He chose us, not because we believed, but that we might believe, lest we should be said first to have chosen Him, and so His word be false (which be it far from us to think possible), "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." Neither are we called because we believed, but that we may believe; and by that calling which is without repentance it is effected and carried through that we should believe. But all the many things which we have said concerning this matter need not to be repeated.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

This is beautiful... have you ever read Augustine? He also believed in all the Catholic Doctrines you are against: the perpetual virginity of Mary, Mary's born without sin, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, Purgatory, etc.

"For MY PART, I should NOT BELIEVE the Gospel except moved by the authority of the Catholic Church. " (Augustine, C. Epis Mani 5,6)

 

[CCWoody]

This is beautiful... have you ever read Augustine? He also believed in all the Catholic Doctrines you are against: the perpetual virginity of Mary, Mary's born without sin, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, Purgatory, etc.

"For MY PART, I should NOT BELIEVE the Gospel except moved by the authority of the Catholic Church. " (Augustine, C. Epis Mani 5,6)

I haven't read all of Augustine's works. And, except for his strong lust for women and his Roman dogma's, he is one of my favorites.

Augustine is ultimately the one who actually pointed out to me exactly why 1 Ti 2:4 can't possible mean all men everywhere without any exception (just to mention something else of his which is on the topic of this thread). I'll see if I can find the tract in Enchridon (sp) tonight.

Eventually, I'll get down to finishing all of Augustine's works.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[Preachers12]

So Christ's purpose in obedience unto death is to actually attain forgiveness for "all sins, past present and future" but He can only accomplish His divinely appointed goal if man cooperates? Is the Will and Purpose of God subject to man now?

God bless

Reformationist, Peace be with you.

I appreciate your fervor, but I thought this was a poll and was simply participating and giving a very brief synopsis of why I voted as I did.

There are many things in here I have read which I do not agree with, but I didn't think that it was necessary to point them out constantly. Hence, I don't think this is the appropriate forum to respond to you on this.

God Bless

 

[SoldierofChrist]

This is beautiful... have you ever read Augustine? He also believed in all the Catholic Doctrines you are against: the perpetual virginity of Mary, Mary's born without sin, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, Purgatory, etc.

Just out of curiousity, where does Augustine state that he believes in this doctrines that you claim him to?

 

[Benedicta00]

I accidentally messed up and voted true when I should have voted false.

Here is my 2 cents on this. I am not looking to debate anyone on here. I am just giving my reasons why I voted the way I did, even though I voted mistakenly. If anyone here would like to address my comments then you know where to find me, in OBOB or IDD.

Anyway, Jesus died for all men, God is sovereign. He willed Jesus’ death to be for all even if all won’t be saved.

Sufficientness, effectiveness, efficaciousness, none of the things effect God’s will, they have no baring on his will. He does need a darn thing; including these in order to make his will happen.

It is effective because he said it is. He willed it to be and how many are saved does not dictate whether or not it was effective. If God deems it effective even if only one soul is saved by it, then so be it.

 

[Miss Shelby]

Yeah, I accidentally hit the wrong choice, too. Take mine off of true. I have no desire to explain my reasons, though.

Michelle