Jesus Christ, died for all

[MoreCoffee]

Some folk seem to dislike goats. I think goats are far more interesting than sheep. They are more independent, and very likely smarter. On top of that they have more android games devoted to them.

Notice the token sheep ... it is included to maintain diversity

:smirk:

 

[Andrew]

Some folk seem to dislike goats. I think goats are far more interesting than sheep. They are more independent, and very likely smarter. On top of that they have more android games devoted to them.

Notice the token sheep ... it is included to maintain diversity

:smirk:

What's going on with you lately? You have been sharing weird Atheist videos lately and have become short with us..
I'm actually worried... you skipped right over the black and white example Christ provided for you (sheep vs goats) and you crack a joke about it.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Because Jesus died for all doesn’t mean that all will come to Him.
His death was sufficient for all, efficient for the elect.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is that fancy speak for Jesus died for all but some who hear about it don't like it.

 

[Josiah]

Because Jesus died for all doesn’t mean that all will come to Him.
His death was sufficient for all, efficient for the elect.

You hit the nail on the head...



Because God teaches Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide as one united, inseperable, effectual truth. These tiny few later-day radical Calvinists desired to make it just "Solus Christus" They renounce Sola Gratia (since actually it's not true in most cases) and to make faith irrelevant; so in their repudiation, they are left with only one thing: God is gracious to some unnamed, unknowable FEW and for THEM Jesus died - and thus they are justified. As if John 3:16 states, "For God loved only a tiny unknowable few (probably not you) so that He gave them only His only begotten son so that they are justified."


As you note, faith is also essential. Faith is the means by which Christ's work is "credited to them" personally, to use Paul's language. It seems these radical Calvinists appointed themselves to tell God (and all people) why some are saved and some not, and since they rejected Sola Gratia and regarded Sola Fide as irrelevant, they concluded that the Bible is wrong when it so often flat-out states Jesus died for all and because that's not true, He died for only some - and thus an unknowable, unnamed few are justified. The Ecumenical Council of Orange left it less defined but completely biblical: God gives Christ to all but not faith to all, Jesus died for all but not all have faith that means it's credited to them. Why doesn't God give faith to all? The Bible doesn't say, and so wise Christians also do not say. That seems wiser than telling God He's wrong about the whole "Jesus died for all" thing. These radical Calvinists telling God He's wrong about Jesus dying for all is just as wrong as the radical Arminianists telling God He's wrong about the giving faith. Just as wrong (probably worse)




.






.

 

[MennoSota]

https://youtu.be/be2SxPLisns

 

[Josiah]

Calvinists AND Arminianists both insist there are only two possible positions: The late 16th Century radical "logical" and very unbiblical inventions of radical Calvinists and Arminianists. They are both wrong. The whole premise here is that the "other" position is the Arminian one. No. The other position is the Bible. And the Ecumenical Council of Orange. And 2000 years of Christian faith. And what you've admitted "two or three Scriptures state" while showing you can't find that verse that has alluded radical Calvinists for over 400 years, "Jesus did NOT die for all, but rather for ONLY SOME.... and those unnamed, unknowable persons for whom He died thus are justified whether or not they have faith."

I find it ironic that this speaker cannot say what Scirpture says - over and over and over, what you admit the Bible flat-out literally says - Christ died for all. Four plus minutes of trying to deny what you admit the Bible says.

No, Jesus did NOT die for everyone "in different ways." The Bible never says that. The Bible says He died for all... and those with faith have faith that credits it to them individually.

 

[RichWh1]

Is that fancy speak for Jesus died for all but some who hear about it don't like it.

Fancy speak? No. Explaining what the death of Jesus provides.
It provides the opportunity for all men to repent as Peter and Paul both state.

The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
2 Peter 3:9 -

This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
1 Timothy 2:3-4 -



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MoreCoffee]

Fancy speak?

I meant that it looked too theological to be normal speaking. But in a Christian discussion forum a lot of language become jargon because of the common use of jargon among Christians.

 

[RichWh1]

I meant that it looked too theological to be normal speaking. But in a Christian discussion forum a lot of language become jargon because of the common use of jargon among Christians.

Well, my answer probably came from having been a student of the Bible at Cairn Univ.
The words I used were mine however the ideaseis come from educators ( theologians) So if it sounds fancy that might be the reason.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MennoSota]

https://youtu.be/tQ3N8YTjEpc

 

[MoreCoffee]

https://youtu.be/tQ3N8YTjEpc

Your hero worship of R C Sproul is touching but problematic because his teaching is often erroneous.

 

[MennoSota]

Your hero worship of R C Sproul is touching but problematic because his teaching is often erroneous.

Thanks for your papal advice. Did you find it in the RCC catechism?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Thanks for your papal advice. Did you find it in the RCC catechism?

Of course.

:smirk:

One must therefore work to correct the errors

quoted from the CCCC

 

[MennoSota]

In what sense did Christ die for the non-elect?
https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/in-what-sense-did-christ-die-for-the-non-elect

 

[Andrew]

In what sense did Christ die for the non-elect?
https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/in-what-sense-did-christ-die-for-the-non-elect

He never did, he died solely for his sheep

 

[Josiah]

He never did, he died solely for his sheep

Then everyone is His sheep. But even there, there is no verse that states Jesus died ONLY..... the word ONLY doesn't even appear in any text on the subject. True, it says He died for X but it doesn't say He died ONLY or JUST or SOLELY for X. If I post, "Donal Trump is an American Citizen" does that dogmatically prove ONLY he is? If I post that I love my son, does that dogmatically prove I hate my wife and will be gloried if she fries eternally in hell? Come on.... And yes, there are some that speak of "others" who are not among the Elect but that doesn't equate to "Jesus died for ONLY some." Only some Calvinists argue ALL are elect; traditional Christians do not argue that all are elect or that all are given faith, but we don't deny what the bible over and over and over directly, literally, verbatim, boldly states: God desires all to be saved, Jesus died for all. IF you can't "connect the dots" don't worry about it, you were never asked to, you are to proclaim the Gospel to ALL. God does the saving, you don't. God knows, even if we don't (and we don't need to) Let God be God, hold Him soverign, not self.

Look, there is mystery here.... but we have a GREAT CORPUS of Scriptures from a wide diversity of biblical books...that flat-out, directly, literally, verbatim STATE He died for all, for everyone. It has been admitted that there are "two or three that do" (lol, it's a lot). There is none that says "only.... just..... solely."

This invention of a few later-day radical Calvinists (today rejected by nearly all Calvinists) was invented out of thin air to give some basis for their concept of double predestination (another distinctive dogma they invented out of thin air); TULIP is not anything if not one, TIGHT, interconnected whole - created to be exactly that. But that doesn't make it true. It just makes it the creation of a tiny number of radical later-day Calvinists in the 16th Century, a view no others shared and today VERY few Calvinists do either.

 

[Andrew]

Then everyone is His sheep. But even there, there is no verse that states Jesus died ONLY..... the word ONLY doesn't even appear in any text on the subject. True, it says He died for X but it doesn't say He died ONLY or JUST or SOLELY for X. If I post, "Donal Trump is an American Citizen" does that dogmatically prove ONLY he is? If I post that I love my son, does that dogmatically prove I hate my wife and will be gloried if she fries eternally in hell? Come on.... And yes, there are some that speak of "others" who are not among the Elect but that doesn't equate to "Jesus died for ONLY some." Only some Calvinists argue ALL are elect; traditional Christians do not argue that all are elect or that all are given faith, but we don't deny what the bible over and over and over directly, literally, verbatim, boldly states: God desires all to be saved, Jesus died for all. IF you can't "connect the dots" don't worry about it, you were never asked to, you are to proclaim the Gospel to ALL. God does the saving, you don't. God knows, even if we don't (and we don't need to) Let God be God, hold Him soverign, not self.

Look, there is mystery here.... but we have a GREAT CORPUS of Scriptures from a wide diversity of biblical books...that flat-out, directly, literally, verbatim STATE He died for all, for everyone. It has been admitted that there are "two or three that do" (lol, it's a lot). There is none that says "only.... just..... solely."

This invention of a few later-day radical Calvinists (today rejected by nearly all Calvinists) was invented out of thin air to give some basis for their concept of double predestination (another distinctive dogma they invented out of thin air); TULIP is not anything if not one, TIGHT, interconnected whole - created to be exactly that. But that doesn't make it true. It just makes it the creation of a tiny number of radical later-day Calvinists in the 16th Century, a view no others shared and today VERY few Calvinists do either.

No it says specifically that Christ lays down his LIFE for his SHEEP! Opposite to the Goats who are damned and have no salvation

 

[Andrew]

Btw Josiah, if you choose Apples over Oranges, it means that you SOLELY choose Apples over Oranges

 

[Josiah]

Your hero worship of R C Sproul is touching but problematic because his teaching is often erroneous.

Sproul TRIES to spin this dogma into something others agree with, to get away from "Jesus died for ONLY SOME" (in fact, he dodges that - very, very craftully and carefully - wise as he is). He never says what the Calvinist here are HONEST to say, the Dogma is "JESUS DID NOT DIE FOR ALL BUT FOR ONLY SOME." Sproul does all he can to avoid that (the dogma!) and I think we know why....


He keeps asking WHY? WHY this? WHY that? And where does he look for the answer? The tradition and inventions of the later-day radical Calvinists. Note the lack of even one Scripture to substantiate this (in fact, the only verses he quotes flat-out teaches the opposite)


MennoSota gave this video to support this dogma of "Jesus did NOT die for all but for ONLY SOME." Something Sproul dodges with GREAT, GREAT skill. The whole issue of this invented he DODGES entirely for 22 minutes. And I think we all know why.

 

[RichWh1]

He never did, he died solely for his sheep

Jesus said He laid down his life for the sheep, not His sheep.

Paul, in Romans 1 writes
“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Romans 1:18-21 - NASB

Paul wrote that mankind knew God but did not exult Him as God.
All these people had a chance to repent, turn to Christ and believe! They chose not to believe



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk