While we were yet sinners...

[Believes Gods Sovereignity]

One verse that is often quoted by those that believe in universal atonement is Romans 5:8 "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." One must understand whom Paul is writing about to fully appreciate this passage. While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. This verse is not talking about those that forever remain sinners; Paul is talking about those who come out of the bondage of sin. The beginning of chapter five declares whom Paul is referring. He is talking about those that are justified through faith; those who rejoice in the hope of the glory of God; those who have been given the Holy Spirit. None of these are characteristic of the heathen who will never be saved.

To believe in a universal atonement, one must believe that every single person on earth is a sheep of Jesus. John 10:11 says "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep." But Jesus lets us know that not everyone is a sheep. John 10:25-26 says "Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." It is very clear from this chapter that some people are sheep and some are not.

We find a similar limit to the sacrifice that Jesus made in Isaiah 53: 11-12 "He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." Isaiah wrote that the Savior would bear the sins of many not all.

Jesus did not waste a single drop of blood. Each person that Jesus came for was bought with a great price. Fellow Saint, Jesus died for you personally. He loved you so much that he gave up everything he had to be humiliated and killed for you personally. If only one name had been in the Lamb’s Book of Life written before the foundation of the world, he would have done the same. All of history and even the creation of everything we see would be centered on Jesus coming to earth to die for you.

Each and every one of us deserves the pit. By the unfailing grace of God he chose to reach down and pull a few out.

 

[Jesus My Wisdom]

One verse that is often quoted by those that believe in universal atonement is Romans 5:8 "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." One must understand whom Paul is writing about to fully appreciate this passage.

That's right. Unfortunately it is a common, and quite natural, habit among humans to include themselves when they see the word "we" or "us." This is a very common and very terrible mistake to make when reading the Scriptures. However, Paul is not talking here about all humans, or all Christians. He is referring to "we" Jews and "us" Jews. See 3:9 and 4:1. Paul is addressing the Jews specifically from chapter 2 to through to chapter 11 whre he then begins to address the Gentiles, "Now I am speaking to you Gentiles."

While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. This verse is not talking about those that forever remain sinners; Paul is talking about those who come out of the bondage of sin. The beginning of chapter five declares whom Paul is referring. He is talking about those that are justified through faith; those who rejoice in the hope of the glory of God; those who have been given the Holy Spirit. None of these are characteristic of the heathen who will never be saved.

More specifically, he is referring to Jews who were justified.

To believe in a universal atonement, one must believe that every single person on earth is a sheep of Jesus. John 10:11 says "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep." But Jesus lets us know that not everyone is a sheep. John 10:25-26 says "Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." It is very clear from this chapter that some people are sheep and some are not.

Yes, some people are his sheep and some are not. He died for his sheep. Indeed, he died for the whole world.
He is the hilasterion for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world

We find a similar limit to the sacrifice that Jesus made in Isaiah 53: 11-12 "He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." Isaiah wrote that the Savior would bear the sins of many not all.

False dilemma. All is many.

Furthermore, the many in question are the Jews of Israel.

Jesus did not waste a single drop of blood. Each person that Jesus came for was bought with a great price. Fellow Saint, Jesus died for you personally. He loved you so much that he gave up everything he had to be humiliated and killed for you personally. If only one name had been in the Lamb’s Book of Life written before the foundation of the world, he would have done the same. All of history and even the creation of everything we see would be centered on Jesus coming to earth to die for you.

Each and every one of us deserves the pit. By the unfailing grace of God he chose to reach down and pull a few out.

No, God sent his Son so that whosoever believes in him might have eternal life.

JMW

 

[christian-only]

Jesus died for all men, yet not all men are saved. Deal with it.

 

[Reformationist]

Jesus died for all men, yet not all men are saved. Deal with it.

Wow. That's so profound and charitable. Let's see, Jesus purposed to save all of humanity and failed. Wow. What should I do? Ooooh. I get it. I should just "deal with it." Cool. That makes so much more sense.

 

[Jesus My Wisdom]

Wow. That's so profound and charitable. Let's see, Jesus purposed to save all of humanity and failed. Wow. What should I do? Ooooh. I get it. I should just "deal with it." Cool. That makes so much more sense.

No, you purposed to think and reason and failed.

Jesus purposed to save humanity. He will.

Secondly, Jesus provided salvation for all and anyone. Itis a gift, not an obligation.

 

[Believes Gods Sovereignity]

No, you purposed to think and reason and failed..

We CANT reason or think about the mind of God. It is impossible. So yeah duh, obviously we will fail.

Jesus purposed to save humanity. He will.

But yet, he hasnt saved ALL of the WHOLE WORLD. Wow, he wanted to do something, and FAILED. Wow, is he still God???

Secondly, Jesus provided salvation for all and anyone. Itis a gift, not an obligation.

So if, by your words, He has provided salvation for all and any, all are already saved and going to heaven. SO we are going to be in heaven with all the abortionists, fornicators, homosexuals, and everyother worker of iniquity??? Wow, some heaven.

 

[Jesus My Wisdom]

But yet, he hasnt saved ALL of the WHOLE WORLD. Wow, he wanted to do something, and FAILED. Wow, is he still God???

You come to many false conclusions because you have many false premises. Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. This does not amount to the whole world being saved.

So if, by your words, He has provided salvation for all and any, all are already saved

False premise. A provision for all is not necessarily known by all.

Go back to square one and get your premises right and then you will be able to draw right conclusions.

JMW

 

[Believes Gods Sovereignity]

You come to many false conclusions because you have many false premises. Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. This does not amount to the whole world being saved.

OK, how is, "But yet, he hasnt saved ALL of the WHOLE WORLD. Wow, he wanted to do something, and FAILED. Wow, is he still God", a false premise. That is logical thinking. If God WANTS to do something (ALL men saved) and DOESNT SAVE ALL OF THEM, the he has failed at what he WANTED to do. And I dont know about you but, 1) Im not going to serve a God that says what he wants, WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED, and it isnt accomplished. And 2) A lying God because he told us time and time again, I AM SOVEREIGN, I will finish my promises, and I will not fail.

False premise. A provision for all is not necessarily known by all.

But wait. You said Christ's death was a provision. And you are right. It was. It was the ultimate sacrifice.

But what im getting at is this. And I want you to catch it.

(((((IF)))))) that provision was MADE FOR EVERYBODY, as you claim, what basis does God have to CONDEM ANYONE??? If the sacrifice was MADE for the whole world, what grounds does God have??? Awnser me that one.


"For the sins of my people was he stricken"
"You shall give him the name Jesus, for he will rescue HIS PEOPLE from their sins."

 

[Jesus My Wisdom]

OK, how is, "But yet, he hasnt saved ALL of the WHOLE WORLD. Wow, he wanted to do something, and FAILED.

You may love a woman and desire that woman love you in return. She might not choose to do so. It does not mean you failed does it? Love calls. God calls.

Many are called but few are chosen.

Wow, is he still God", a false premise. That is logical thinking. If God WANTS to do something (ALL men saved) and DOESNT SAVE ALL OF THEM, the he has failed at what he WANTED to do.

And I dont know about you but, 1) Im not going to serve a God that says what he wants, WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED, and it isnt accomplished. And 2) A lying God because he told us time and time again, I AM SOVEREIGN, I will finish my promises, and I will not fail.

Now you seem to be confusing his promises to us with our failure to live in hHis promises. You also seem to be confusing His promises to us with the desires of his heart.

False premises can get you into a heap of bad thinking friend.

This stuff they taught you down at Calvinist central you also seem to think is going to work for you. Afer all, it sounded good to you.

You are in for quite a surprise. And it might come as a surprise to you that all these faulty ideas of yours are very old hat to this poster.

But wait. You said Christ's death was a provision. And you are right. It was. It was the ultimate sacrifice.

But what im getting at is this. And I want you to catch it.

(((((IF)))))) that provision was MADE FOR EVERYBODY, as you claim, what basis does God have to CONDEM ANYONE???

Not everyone has the sacrifice applied to them. Some refuse God's grace.

If the sacrifice was MADE for the whole world, what grounds does God have??? Awnser me that one.

Easy. It is a provision, not an application.

If I make a provision here on my table for you to sit down and share a meal and you do not show up you are out of luck friend.

"For the sins of my people was he stricken"
"You shall give him the name Jesus, for he will rescue HIS PEOPLE from their sins."

The Jews my friend. He came to save the Jews.

Now the Gentiles may come in.

"I only came for the lost house of Israel" - Jesus Christ.

You have much to learn.

JMW

 

[Jesus My Wisdom]

 

[Reformationist]

No, you purposed to think and reason and failed.

Wow. Much more of this wit and I'll just be overcome. I think it's great when people, like yourself, make jibes about someone and then make ridiculous, non-sensical statements like this:

Jesus purposed to save humanity. He will.

Why didn't you just say you were a universalist. Then I could have just ignored everything you said right from the get go and not wasted my time reading the posts you make. Well, at least I know now, right?

Secondly, Jesus provided salvation for all and anyone. Itis a gift, not an obligation.

LOL! The fact that this make sense to you is the saddest thing. You're clearly not unintelligent. In fact, it's clear you fancy yourself quite the intellectual. Unfortunately for you, the wisdom of God isn't gleaned by fallen man's efforts and they certainly aren't explained by making pointless statements like "Jesus provided salvation for all and anyone." That makes no sense, unless, of course, you're a universalist, which you seem to be. You seem to like to speak in riddles. It strikes me as odd that someone who is as articulate as you makes statements you haven't seemed to have thought through. You say stuff like "Jesus provided salvation for everyone" and then infer that we have to choose to accept it for it to be manifested. That is so ridiculous. Either Jesus provided it or He didn't. If He did, then the person He provided it for is saved. If His provision is contingent upon our acceptance then He didn't provide it. You can't have it both ways. Either Jesus ACTUALLY accomplished a person's salvation or all He did was accomplish the POSSIBILITY of that person being saved. Which is it? The theories you purport claim contradictions, i.e., Jesus actually accomplished the salvation of humanity but not all humans are/will be saved. That is a contradiction. Either Jesus is the ACTUAL Savior of all who are/will be saved or He is the POTENTIAL Savior of all humanity. Which is it? If He's the ACTUAL Savior of all who are/will be saved then we have aligned ourselves, at least on that point, with the Gospel. If we reduce His obedience unto death to nothing more than the POTENTIAL salvation of all humanity then we must, at least, concede the possibility that no one would have availed themselves of His "offer" of salvation and He would have been sent and died in vain. Are you comfortable with that possibility? Then, if we are going to consider the possibility that no one would have availed themselves of His "offer" we must, in fairness, consider the possibility that everyone would have accepted His "offer." Now we're back to universalism. Are you comfortable with that theory?

 

[Reformationist]

Jesus died for the sins of the whole world.

JMW, what did His death for the sins of the world accomplish? Did it actually accomplish anything or did it merely provide the possiblity that these sins, if offset by some measure of personal penitence, might be forgiven?

This does not amount to the whole world being saved.

You're right. In fact, according to what you seem to be claiming His death didn't ensure the salvation of a single person. Great idea of a Savior.

False premise. A provision for all is not necessarily known by all.

Go back to square one and get your premises right and then you will be able to draw right conclusions.

JMW

This is mindless double speak. "A provision for all is not necessarily known by all?" How in the world is that relevent to what we're talking about? Try not to be so cryptic. It doesn't make you sound any smarter. Just say what you mean.

 

[Reformationist]

You may love a woman and desire that woman love you in return.

Talk about false premises. What do you think you will glean about the roles and relationships of Creator to creation by comparing them to creation to creation? This may give us some limited insight into the Gospel but we have to be very careful how far we take this. Do we impose the same weaknesses of our flesh upon God? Do we impose the same limitations of our state of being created on God? Do we limit the power, purpose, and knowledge of God, as our own is finite? Clearly we cannot. Clearly you have.

She might not choose to do so.

If we're going to analogize the relationship of one impotent creation to another to that of omnipotent Creator we must establish some bounderies. First, did we create the woman? Does that woman, in every aspect of her being, despise me? Do we have the power to change her very nature?

It does not mean you failed does it?

It depends on what my goal was. If my goal in loving her was to incline her heart to me then apparantly I did. If it was merely to show her that I care about her, well, that would be something only she could tell us.

Love calls. God calls.

Uh huh. Great. Does God call all people the same way?

Many are called but few are chosen.

Uh huh. Why are those that are chosen actually chosen? For instance, if you, yourself, were chosen, why were you chosen?

Not everyone has the sacrifice applied to them. Some refuse God's grace.

So the efficacy of God's redemptive work is contingent upon your acceptance? You seriously need to study the nature of fallen man and his natural rebellious disposition to God in his unregenerate state. You start with a supposition and then try to prove your supposition by assuming that that which you are trying to prove is already true. That's the height of incompetence.

Okay, I'll play along with your man-centered gospel. Why, JMW, so some accept the sacrifice, and it is subsequently "applied," and others reject the sacrifice, and it is summarily not "applied?"

Easy. It is a provision, not an application.

If I make a provision here on my table for you to sit down and share a meal and you do not show up you are out of luck friend.

That's absolutely true. Did Jesus make room for us at the banqueting table or did He personally ensure our presence at the banqueting table? If it is only the former, pray tell, why do some "show up" and others don't?

"I only came for the lost house of Israel" - Jesus Christ.

You have much to learn.

JMW

Wow. Arrogance in the face of your own ignorance.

Romans 9:6,7
But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, "In Isaac your seed shall be called."

The efficiency of God's elective call is such that He not only determines the geneological path that the incarnation will occur, He purposes the entirity of His family:

Romans 9:11
for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls

Romans 9:15,16
For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." So then it is NOT of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.

You have much to learn JMW.

By the way, what verse is it that you quote above? I ask because if you take "lost house of Israel" to mean the Jews then us non-Jews are in some serious trouble, unless of course you think we'll sneak into Heaven without God noticing.

 

[kel32]

Either Jesus provided it or He didn't. If He did, then the person He provided it for is saved. If His provision is contingent upon our acceptance then He didn't provide it. You can't have it both ways. Either Jesus ACTUALLY accomplished a person's salvation or all He did was accomplish the POSSIBILITY of that person being saved. Which is it? The theories you purport claim contradictions, i.e., Jesus actually accomplished the salvation of humanity but not all humans are/will be saved. That is a contradiction. Either Jesus is the ACTUAL Savior of all who are/will be saved or He is the POTENTIAL Savior of all humanity. Which is it? If He's the ACTUAL Savior of all who are/will be saved then we have aligned ourselves, at least on that point, with the Gospel. If we reduce His obedience unto death to nothing more than the POTENTIAL salvation of all humanity then we must, at least, concede the possibility that no one would have availed themselves of His "offer" of salvation and He would have been sent and died in vain. ?

Ref,

I ask this out of seeking understanding and not for purposes of debate.

You said : "Either Jesus is the ACTUAL Savior of all who are/will be saved or He is the POTENTIAL Savior of all humanity. Which is it?"

Can't it be both?

~peace~

 

[Jesus My Wisdom]

I see we have another post here that does not address the issues.

LOL! The fact that this make sense to you is the saddest thing. You're clearly not unintelligent. In fact, it's clear you fancy yourself quite the intellectual. Unfortunately for you, the wisdom of God isn't gleaned by fallen man's efforts and they certainly aren't explained by making pointless statements like "Jesus provided salvation for all and anyone." That makes no sense, unless, of course, you're a universalist, which you seem to be. You seem to like to speak in riddles. It strikes me as odd that someone who is as articulate as you makes statements you haven't seemed to have thought through. You say stuff like "Jesus provided salvation for everyone" and then infer that we have to choose to accept it for it to be manifested.

Correct. An intelligent person can comprehend that. Tell you what. I will proved 10 dollars for you. It is right here. Do you have it yet?

That is so ridiculous. Either Jesus provided it or He didn't.

He did provide a sacrifice for our sins. Oh yes he did.

If He did, then the person He provided it for is saved.

False, an if you really were as intelligent as you want to make yourself out to be you could easily see how that was possible.

If His provision is contingent upon our acceptance then He didn't provide it.

I provided 10 dollars for you. It is right here. Accept or not?

You can't have it both ways. Either Jesus ACTUALLY accomplished a person's salvation

Whoa there johnny. He is accomplishing salvation. He accomplished a sacrifice for your sins. Those sins are not washed away until a person is saved in his lifetime. Read your Bible. acts 22:16 would be a good place to start to find out WHEN your sins were taken away.

or all He did was accomplish the POSSIBILITY of that person being saved. Which is it?

Possibility. This 10 bucks here is a possibility for you. I will sacrifice it for you.

The theories you purport claim contradictions, i.e., Jesus actually accomplished the salvation of humanity but not all humans are/will be saved.

The contradiction is all yours my friend because you are very short sighted.

Jesus accomplished a sacrifice at Calvary. He is now in the process of saving people.

That is a contradiction. Either Jesus is the ACTUAL Savior of all who are/will be saved

He is.

or He is the POTENTIAL Savior of all humanity. Which is it?

He is the Savior of all humanity. You don't catch on to that do you? Let me help you catch on. You are playing this little Calvinist game where you think that if one does not accept your position then one must take the position all humans are saved. It is quite wrong and you can't figure out why because you are basing your conclusions on false premises.

"For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers."

I always thought that verse was interesting. Wanna add in a couple words there like "all types of men" LOL.

You think if Jesus is the Savior of all humanity it means he saves all humanity and must save all humanity to be the Savior of all humanity. Here is why you are wrong.

Being the Savior of all humanity means he is God's provision of salvation for all and any human being. He is the appointed Savior for everyone whether or not they choose to be saved. You don't need to grab onto to the hand of the Savior for him to pull you out of condemnation for him to be your Savior friend.
If you do not take his hand he was and is still the Savior. He is the Lord of all, and the Savior of all, whether you agree with him or not. He is the Lord of unbelievers whether they serve him or not. And he is the Savior of the unsaved whether they are saved by him or not.

If He's the ACTUAL Savior of all who are/will be saved then we have aligned ourselves, at least on that point, with the Gospel. If we reduce His obedience unto death to nothing more than the POTENTIAL salvation of all humanity then we must, at least, concede the possibility that no one would have availed themselves of His "offer" of salvation and He would have been sent and died in vain.

TOTALLY incorrect.

Jesus died first for the sins committed by Israel under the first covenant. He came to save his people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Also read Heb 9-10. If not one single soul turned their life to Christ after the cross he was still the Savior of all those who lived and died under the Law.

Are you comfortable with that possibility?

Misguided and shortsighted presumption on your part. Too much Calvinist doctrine has blinded you.

Then, if we are going to consider the possibility that no one would have availed themselves of His "offer" we must, in fairness, consider the possibility that everyone would have accepted His "offer." Now we're back to universalism. Are you comfortable with that theory?

And you are quite wrong my friend as I have shown.

JMW

 

[Bulldog]

Whoa there johnny. He is accomplishing salvation. He accomplished a sacrifice for your sins. Those sins are not washed away until a person is saved in his lifetime. Read your Bible. acts 22:16 would be a good place to start to find out WHEN your sins were taken away.

Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.


JMW, is Christ's death at Calvary merely accomplished open salvation for somone to accept, than His death did not accomplish or establish anyone's salvation, only the potential or possibility for it. Are you a univerislist?

 

[Jesus My Wisdom]

Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.


JMW, is Christ's death at Calvary merely accomplished open salvation for somone to accept, than His death did not accomplish or establish anyone's salvation, only the potential or possibility for it.

That is totally incorrect. Jesus came only for the lost house of Israel. He came to save his people from their sins. When Jesus died on Calvary, his death secured the salvation of all who lived and sinned under the first covenant. It is there in your Bible.

Jesus' death does not EFFECT salvation for you; it provides atonement for you and not you specifically but for you if you accept it God's gift. Jesus' sacrifice was for any person and any number of people. The atonement is effective to anyone until it is applied to them. For example, Paul had his sins washed away when after he had met Jesus on the road to Damascus. His sins were not taken away on Calvary. Neither were yours. They are taken away when you accept God's sacrifice if you choose to do so.

Are you a univerislist?

No, you make false conclusions based on the false premises of false doctrines.
I completely understand why you say what you do. It is also wrong.

JMW

 

[Reformationist]

Ref,

I ask this out of seeking understanding and not for purposes of debate.

You said : "Either Jesus is the ACTUAL Savior of all who are/will be saved or He is the POTENTIAL Savior of all humanity. Which is it?"

Can't it be both?

~peace~

Of course not. If our salvation is nothing more than a potentiality then none of us can ever enter the rest that is our part and parcel of no longer being at war with God. We will never feel secure and we can never take any comfort in the promises of God. Think about it, if God says He will work ALL things to the good of those who love Him and are called according to His purpose then we must humbly acknowledge that while we are capable of decisions those decisions do not, nor can they, thwart the will of God for our lives. We are His creation, created for His pleasure and glory.

Additionally, potentiality conveys a possibility of failure. If Christ's death could potentially save all of mankind then we must, by virtue of our argument, acknowledge the possibility that Christ's death could potentially save none of mankind. There are manifold verses that clearly show that Christ IS the Savior of mankind. The dilemma of whether Christ EVER fails to accomplish the salvation of someone He sets out to save is one that proponants of Calvinistic doctrine NEVER face. The reason we are not subjegated to such unsurety is because we know that the Lord ALWAYS accomplishes His divine will and is never thwarted. Sure, man resists. But, as the saying goes, "man proposes, God disposes." The point to take note of isn't whether Christ's death is effecacious in appeasing the wrath of God but, rather, for whom was it efficacious. No Christian who gives the sacrifice of Christ much thought doubts the ultimate value of Christ's blood on the Cross. We will ask ourselves, "Would God find the death of His righteous Son of sufficient value to atone for the sins of another?" That is, fortunately, a no brainer. The whole reason He was sent by the Father was to atone. Clearly God knew that Christ's sacrifice would accomplish exactly what He was sent to accomplish. If it did not, or even could not, then He failed and ceases to be worthy of our worship as the immutable, sinless God who works all things according to His will. Once that acknowledgement is made we are able to see that those who end up being saved are saved by the grace of God in crediting us with the righteous and efficacious death of Christ (our sacrifice would be insufficient to atone for our own sins much less the sins of another) and those who are not saved were never atoned for. You see, we can't have it both ways. We cannot, at least not if we have any desire for consistancy, claim that salvation is solely by the grace of God and couple that with the idea that that same grace is incapable unless we allow it to accomplish its purpose. Is the grace of God capable of accomplishing that for which He purposes it or is man sovereign and capable of thwarting God's will. If it's the latter then, unfortunately, we are all doomed because we can never depend on God's ability to overcome our sinful rebelliousness. Thankfully we can be confident that He who has begun this good work in us WILL complete it.

Thank God that His grace is capable and faithful, even in the face of our unfaithfulness.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Tell you what. I will proved 10 dollars for you. It is right here. Do you have it yet?

Once again the saddest part is that you clearly think this is a parallel to the biblical account of salvation. At least provide some sort of key for your man centered analogy. Who do you represent? What does the 10 dollars represent? What was our relationship to each other? Why would you provide me with "10 dollars?" In what way was it "provided?" You see, Christ didn't just say, "Hey, here's salvation. Come and get it. Do you have it yet?" He made us alive when we were dead. He didn't just "offer us life." He made us alive. He made us acceptable to God.

I'll show you the common man centered parallel to the Gospel, which, ironically, parallels your own analogy:

A Man creates an elixir that brings the dead back to life. He takes it to a morgue that is filled with cadavers.

So, the man stands at the entrance of the room of bodies and says, "Listen up people. I have an elixir that provides eternal life to all who partake of it. The best part of all....it's absolutely free. All you have to do is get in line."

The above paragraph is the incongruous idea of the Gospel of those who attribute their salvation to their willful act of acceptance, even if they acknowledge that aside from asking for it they had to do nothing to get it. The unfortunate part is that, in doing so, they make the elixir of absolutely no value unless consentually used. It is not, in fact, the elixir that accomplishes these people's eternal rebirth but, rather, the combination of the elixir and their willful action of partaking. Never can they say and truly believe, "I was saved solely by the grace of God." No matter how they phrase it, the minute they introduce their own willful act of partaking, and they must acknowledge their willful act, they have boasted in their own part of the process and stolen for themselves at least a portion of the glory that belongs to God alone. According to the "get in line" idea, the grace of God in providing the remedy to their state of being dead was absolutely incapable of accomplishing anything unless they consented to it. On top of all that, making their consent a prerequisite for being given the elixir denies the biblical account of their fallen inability.

Now, let me show you the Calvinistic version of that same event:

A Man creates an elixir that brings the dead back to life. He takes it to a morgue that is filled with cadavers.

So, the man stands at the entrance of the room of bodies and says, "Listen up people. I have an elixir that provides eternal life to all who partake of it. The best part of all....it's absolutely free. Now, being that I am the Creator of aforementioned elixir and am under no obligation to bring any of you back to life I have decided that out of the 50 bodies I will regenerate 40 of you. Those who are brought back to life will come to love what I have done all that much more because they will clearly see the effect that NOT getting the elixir produces, i.e., you would say dead. Now, seeing as how you are ALL currently incapable of coming up and getting your free portion I will administer this elixir to the 40 I have chosen. I did not choose those 40 because they were attractive or smart or nice or worthy. I chose them because it glorifies me to be merciful to them and my glory and greatness is shown and pronounced in their lives." At this point the Man administers the elixir of life to those He has chosen and they are made alive.

Now, this analogy could go on and on and would still fall far short of the actual biblical account of the greatness and humility of Christ's atonement but hopefully even you can see the difference in the anthropocentric approach to salvation in the first example, which parallels your "10 dollar" analogy, and the Christ centered approach of the latter.

He did provide a sacrifice for our sins. Oh yes he did.

Okay. Good. And did that sacrifice accomplish what it set out to accomplish? If so, what was the goal that that sacrifice was purposed to accomplish?

False, an if you really were as intelligent as you want to make yourself out to be you could easily see how that was possible.

You biggest mistake is not in acknowledging whether we make willful decisions but, rather, what choices we do make. You include our eternal salvation, which was wrought FOR us but the blood of Christ in that list of choices. That's all well and good if the sacrifice was made TO us. It wasn't. Once again you have made the mistake of including yourself and your decisions in a transaction that didn't include you as other than the object of either mercy or wrath. This transaction, i.e., the plan of God, was something that was decided upon by the Godhead. They didn't call and consult either you or I.

I provided 10 dollars for you. It is right here. Accept or not?

LOL! You're not Christ and I'm not dead so your silly little analogy is moot.

He is accomplishing salvation.

For whom?

He accomplished a sacrifice for your sins. Those sins are not washed away until a person is saved in his lifetime.

Okay. Let me see if I can get your convoluted reasoning. Christ actually accomplished a sacrifice for each and every sin that each and every member of humanity ever committed but that sacrifice is not affected until that person "accepts" the sacrifice? Did I get that right? If so, what about the sins of those for whom Christ actually accomplished a sacrifice but never accept? I'm assuming that they don't get atoned for but if that's the case then wouldn't that mean that Christ suffered on the Cross for sins that are not ultimately forgiven?

Read your Bible.

Wow. What a lightening bolt. Why didn't I think of that?

acts 22:16 would be a good place to start to find out WHEN your sins were taken away.

Wow. Acts 22:16. That's great JMW. Thanks to you I've realized that I don't need Jesus at all. According to Acts 22:16 I can wash away my own sins. Cool. Baptism in the New Testament is an outward sign of an inward cleansing. As such, it parallels circumcision in the Old Testament.

Possibility. This 10 bucks here is a possibility for you. I will sacrifice it for you.

Oooooh. I get it. Jesus is the possible Savior of mankind. Great. I'm glad you cleared that up for me. Just keep talking. I would venture to say you're doing more to destroy your credibility than I am.

The contradiction is all yours my friend because you are very short sighted.

Actually I don't wear glasses at all. I have 20/15 vision. But thanks for the concern.

Jesus accomplished a sacrifice at Calvary. He is now in the process of saving people.

So He "accomplished a sacrifice at Calvary?" What purpose did that sacrifice at Calvary serve, other than, of course, for Him to die? Did His death actually accomplish anything?

He is the Savior of all humanity. You don't catch on to that do you?

I don't "catch on to that" because it's ridiculously non-sensical. How is Jesus the Savior of all humanity when there are many that won't be saved? Is Jesus the Savior of those who won't be saved?

Let me help you catch on. You are playing this little Calvinist game where you think that if one does not accept your position then one must take the position all humans are saved. It is quite wrong and you can't figure out why because you are basing your conclusions on false premises.

Aside from being a juvenile attempt, and a very uncreative one at that, to discredit my views I'm not sure how you thought this would "help me catch on." Did I miss your jewel of wisdom because it was covered in the filth of your double speak or did you just forget to "help me catch on?"

"For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers."

LOL! Man...this is so classic. You post this as if it supports your position. Do you think it goes over better if we just ignore "especially of believers?" LOL! All this does is blast a big ol' .44 caliber sized hole in your position. God is the Savior of all men but not all men will be saved? The fact that you'd make that argument is ridiculous. It's as if you've spent 8½ seconds reading Scripture and now you're some authority. First off, this is probably not talking about the salvitic role of Christ in redemption. It's most likely talking about the preservatory role of God in creating and maintaining humanity. In this sense the verse would read like:

1 Timothy 4:10
For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior (Preserver/Deliverer) of all men, especially (most of all) of those who believe.

*italics mine

You see, God providentially preserves the entirity of humanity. His grace, in some form, rains on the just and the unjust. He does not, however, extend His grace in the same manner to all people. He preserves, by His merciful grace, all of humanity while He specially blesses those who believe with eternal life.

I always thought that verse was interesting. Wanna add in a couple words there like "all types of men" LOL.

No. I did add definitions for the clarity of my view.

You think if Jesus is the Savior of all humanity it means he saves all humanity and must save all humanity to be the Savior of all humanity.

LOL! ROTFLOL!! LOL! Thanks JMW. I really needed that laugh.

Being the Savior of all humanity means he is God's provision of salvation for all and any human being. He is the appointed Savior for everyone whether or not they choose to be saved. You don't need to grab onto to the hand of the Savior for him to pull you out of condemnation for him to be your Savior friend.
If you do not take his hand he was and is still the Savior. He is the Lord of all, and the Savior of all, whether you agree with him or not. He is the Lord of unbelievers whether they serve him or not. And he is the Savior of the unsaved whether they are saved by him or not.

Um....if the unsaved are not saved by Him for what is it that He was their Savior? From what did He save them if they are, uh...unsaved?

Good luck getting that whole "Jesus is the Savior of all humanity even of those who aren't saved by Him" thing to fly. It certainly isn't found anywhere in the Gospel, or in rational thought.

 

[Ben johnson]

You said : "Either Jesus is the ACTUAL Savior of all who are/will be saved or He is the POTENTIAL Savior of all humanity. Which is it?"

Can't it be both?

Why can't it be both? Paul said in 1Tim4:10, "He is the Savior of ALL MEN, malista believers." "Malista" according to Strong's Greek, is "chiefly, above all". This seems to present the UNIVERSAL OFFER of salvation, conditioned upon BELIEF.

To believe in a universal atonement, one must believe that every single person on earth is a sheep of Jesus. John 10:11 says "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep." But Jesus lets us know that not everyone is a sheep. John 10:25-26 says "Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." It is very clear from this chapter that some people are sheep and some are not.

No, not everyone is "sheep". But let's be careful about Jn10:26
("You do not believe, because you are not of My sheep.") WHAT is it that do they not believe?
They don't believe that He is the MESSIAH.

Will you consider a point of view? What if Jn10:9 ("I am the door, if TIS-ANYONE enters through Me, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out and find pasture.") --- what if this means that ANYONE who BELIEVES (enters), willl be SAVED, will BECOME SHEEP? If you CONSIDER that, then verse 26 becomes correctly understood:
"You do not believe that I am the Messiah, because you have not believed in ME."

No this is not "double-talk" (saying, "you do not believe Me because you have not believed Me"), it's saying "if you had ACCEPTED what I TOLD you, that I am sent from God, if you had RECEIVED Me and BELIEVED, then just as Peter knew, you would then have also known that I am the Messiah.

You see, when Jesus talked with Peter in Matt16:15-17 (" 'Who do you say I am?' Peter said, 'You are the Messiah.' Jesus said, 'Blessed are you ...for My Father has revealed this to you.' ") --- compare this with John8:42 ("If God WAS your Father THEN you would love ME") --- and doesn't it seem more aligned with, "You believe in God, believe also in Me (Jn14:1); if you BELIEVE/RECEIVE Me, THEN you will know that I'm the Messiah"? Doesn't that fit better, than: "if God ELECTS you THEN you know I'm the Messiah"?

Peter knew Jesus was the Messiah, because Peter believed and loved Jesus. It was THROUGH his belief that he understood Jesus' Messiahship. And in Luke22:32, Jesus prays that Peter NOT FAIL IN HIS FAITH. Jesus worried about Peter's salvation.

I think Jn10:9 really says "IF you (anyone) enter Me, THEN you will become My sheep".