Jesus Christ, died for all

[atpollard]

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

The context is a bit more complex than that. Jesus also told the unbelieving crowd that the reason that they did not believe was because they were not his sheep. He also said that the Father gave Jesus the sheep that were his.

As far as “the” sheep vs “His” sheep, the context was the Good Shepherd lays down His life for the sheep and immediately follows with “you are not my sheep” and “my sheep hear and follow”. So the case for arguing that the Good Shepherd died for His sheep is exactly as strong as the case that the Good Shepherd died for those that the Father did not give him, who do not believe, who do not know Him and whom He does not know and who are not his sheep (in just that one verse stating “the sheep”).

I believe that other verses, like the “sheep and the goats” and “I never knew you” and the “wrath of God remaining” (John 3:18) lend support for the Good Shepherd guarding His flock and laying down His life for his sheep. However I acknowledge that is not the only possible interpretation. It just seems the most in harmony with the rest of the analogies about sheep surrounding that verse.

Jesus dying for “not my sheep” makes his gift largely worthless ... Jesus then died for many but actually only saved a few (the narrow vs the wide path), while Jesus dying for “His sheep” means that Jesus saved EVERYONE that he died for. Was Jesus death 10% successful or 100% successful? Did Jesus save a few of those He died for or did Jesus save all that He died for?

 

[MennoSota]

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

None of what you wrote has to do with who Jesus died for. Your verses explain the sinful nature of man.
In what sense did Jesus die for the non-elect?
https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/in-what-sense-did-christ-die-for-the-non-elect

Now, what’s the effect of this focused, particular redemption for the bride, the sheep, the elect? What does the death do that’s unique for the bride? I think*Romans 8:32*gives the answer: “He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all” — now pause.

The “us all” in the context of*Romans 8:32*is clearly the elect. It’s not the whole world. It’s the elect. “He did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all.” You can see this in the next verse: “Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn?” (Romans 8:33–34). That’s how verse 32 is being fulfilled, and you can see it in the rest of this verse. Let start again from the beginning and read the rest of the verse.

“He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?” In other words, the death of Christ for his people secures and guarantees for them every saving blessing there is.

“Will he not also with him graciously give us all things?” Yes, he will because that is what the death of Christ guarantees for all the elect. If God gave his Son in this same way for every person on the planet, then that promise would attach to every person because it’s attached to the blood of Jesus, to the sacrifice of Jesus. That means every person would be saved, would be guaranteed every possible blessing, which Paul says clearly is not the case (in places like*2 Thessalonians 1:9).

Not an Offer

What can we say about how the death of Christ expresses itself for the elect and the non-elect who reject him? How is it different? For the elect, the blood of Jesus is the blood of the new covenant, which purchases for them a new heart, new life, faith, and obedience.

Jesus says that in*Luke 22:20: “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” The blood of Jesus is purchasing the new covenant.

The new covenant is not an offer of salvation. It’s an accomplishment of salvation in the hearts of God’s people. He gives them a new heart and a new spirit, a gift of life, gift of faith, gift of obedience.

All Can Come

Now, back to*John 3:16*for the other side of how the death of Christ relates to the world, or to the non-elect. I think the wording of*John 3:16*provides the answer of how to speak of the gift of Christ, the death of Christ, for the non-elect, the whole world.

Here’s how he puts it: “God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” He loved the world so that everyone who believes would have life.

The way to speak about the giving of the Son as an expression of love to the world is to highlight the word*that: “That*whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

That’s the connection we make between the death of Christ and every person on this planet. Christ accomplished a completely full and satisfactory and effective redemption for whosoever believes.

You may look (and should look) everyone in the eye — absolutely everyone in your neighborhood, at your church, at your work — and say, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will never perish. Believe on him, and you will become a full and complete participant in the perfect salvation, the perfect payment for sins, the perfect propitiation of the wrath of God, the perfect obedience for imputation, the perfect deliverance from death and hell and Satan and into the everlasting glory of God. All of that is yours — it’s yours for the believing because of Jesus’s death.”

We could never talk like that to people — we don’t know who the non-elect are so let’s just assume there’s lots of them that are listening — if Jesus hadn’t died the way he did. That is a great and awesome gift that we are indebted to give to the entire world. Oh, that God would put fire in our hearts to take that message to the ends of the earth.

 

[Josiah]

The context is a bit more complex than that. Jesus also told the unbelieving crowd that the reason that they did not believe was because they were not his sheep. He also said that the Father gave Jesus the sheep that were his.

However you want/need to spin this, it does not say "Jesus did not die for all but for ONLY SOME." It cannot be used to contradict the many, many verses from a diversity of biblical books that flat-out, directly, verbatim state that Jesus died for all, for everyone, for the world.


Everyone agrees that Jesus died for His sheep. He also died for women and for little Japanese boys and for 7 feet tall Swedish men, even for Donald Trump. The verse does not say "ONLY". Which is why Dr. Sproul works SO HARD for over 20 minutes to evade the very dogma he claims to be defending, never once even mentioning the dogma that "Jesus did NOT die for all but rather for ONLY SOME" - he never even mentions the dogma he claims to be defending, and never once even attempts to quote a verse that states the dogma (only verses that state the opposite).


Folks like to ask questions.... SOME of them good questions.... and they tend to appoint self as the all-wise one (exclusively lead by God) to answer the question they asked themselves. Okay. But at times, the "answer" they give to self directly contradicts SO many clear, direct, verbatim Scriptures (as well as 2,000 years of Christian faith and perhaps even Ecumenical Councils they CLAIM to accept). Nothin' wrong with theories and spins..... unless they are the opposite of what God Himself undeniably states.


Calvinists like to ask "How come some are saved and not others?" It's a good question, but the better response that 99.99% of Christians embrace and the one in line with Scripture is "not all have faith." That's the position of the Ecumenical Council of Orange (which dogmatized the doctrine of election); election applies to who receives faith, NOT for whom Jesus died. Now, why did Jesus die for people who would not be given faith? The Bible doesn't say, but Calvinism hasn't evaded that since it argues that Jesus' death is SUFFICIENT for all (a point the Bible never says, btw). The Bible states, Jesus died for all... not all have faith. I suspect that's correct. If that leaves a question, then IMO that's our problem and not God's. I have a list of hundreds of questions Scripture doesn't anwwer, doesn't mean ergo I can answer it and tell God He has to agree with me. "My ways are not your ways." "My thoughts are not your thoughts." Luther, "The God who gave us our mind surely knows more than we do, the God who gave us our eyes surely sees more than we do." Luther - "Humility is the foundation of all sound theology."

Jesus dying for “not my sheep” makes his gift largely worthless ...

No. It simply makes it unreceived, not relied upon. Friend, I love my son. Does that mandate that ergo my son will always embrace it? When you evangelize (if you do) you are offering them a gift, some won't accept it, does that make the gift worthless? If I buy you a $50.00 Starbucks gift card and you never used it does that mean it's not worth $50.00?

But the problem with this "Jesus did NOT die for all but rather for ONLY A FEW" invention of a tiny few later-day radical Calvinists (the dogma Dr. Sproul evades with all his skill as he claims to be defending it) is not that it makes sense but that it flat-out contradicts SO many diverse Scriptures that STATE the EXACT OPPOSITE. As well as 2000 years of Christian faith, the Council of Orange, etc. And creates far more problems than it "solves" including God offering people something He doesn't have for them (making Him a liar?) and requiring that you tell everyone something that's not true for most of them and meaning that no one can know if their faith in Christ actually means a thing since there's no way to know if that faith is embracing something that actually exists for them (it probably doesn't) and a host of other problems. The invention is not only in direct conflict with SO many Scriptures but creates a lot more problems than simply leaving it where Scripture does: Jesus did for all but not all receive faith that "credits" it to them.





.

 

[MennoSota]

I finally figured out why I have such conflict with Josiah's twisted perspective.
I am reading a book by Paul Alexander and Mark Dever entitled, "The Deliberate Church: Building Your Ministry on the Gospel." On page 77 the author describes the Regulative Principle of worship as opposed to the Normative Principle of worship.
Quote:
"Briefly, the Regulative Principle states that everything we do in a corporate worship gathering must be clearly warranted by Scripture. Clear warrant can either take the form of an explicit biblical command, or a good and necessary implication of a biblical text. The Regulative Principle has historically competed with the Normative Principle, crystalized by the Anglican minister, Richard Hooker. Hooker argued, along with Martin Luther before him, that as long as a practice is not biblically forbidden, a church is free to use it to order its corporate life and worship. In short, the Regulative Principle forbids anything not commanded by Scripture, whereas the Normative Principle allows anything not forbidden by Scripture."
Josiah promotes the Normative Principle, while I promote the Regulative Principle. It explains why we disagree.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I finally figured out why I have such conflict with Josiah's....

I am tempted to type "well duh" ... which I just have typed

Your posts seem to be in conflict with everyone who disagrees with your theology. Not mild mannered polite conflict either.

And Christ did in fact die for all as the holy scriptures say ... despite your posts' traditions-of-men objections.

 

[Andrew]

I am tempted to type "well duh" ... which I just have typed

Your posts seem to be in conflict with everyone who disagrees with your theology. Not mild mannered polite conflict either.

And Christ did in fact die for all as the holy scriptures say ... despite your posts' traditions-of-men objections.

So jesus died for the non elect?
so the non elect go to heaven? everyone goes to heaven! Sounds awesome! But there are some verses that say some will not go to heaven, must have been a typo

 

[MoreCoffee]

So jesus died for the non elect?
so the non elect go to heaven? everyone goes to heaven! Sounds awesome! But there are some verses that say some will not go to heaven, must have been a typo

Put up your post's illogic Andrew, before you run yourself through with it

I like that line. Very good and suitable for all sorts of variations.

:smirk:

 

[MennoSota]

I am tempted to type "well duh" ... which I just have typed

Your posts seem to be in conflict with everyone who disagrees with your theology. Not mild mannered polite conflict either.

And Christ did in fact die for all as the holy scriptures say ... despite your posts' traditions-of-men objections.

MC, scripture speaks differently than you.

 

[MennoSota]

Put up your post's illogic Andrew, before you run yourself through with it

I like that line. Very good and suitable for all sorts of variations.

:smirk:

No illogic on Andrews part. There is an exception to your statement, which you simply don't care about, which leaves you with doublespeak.

 

[Andrew]

Put up your post's illogic Andrew, before you run yourself through with it

I like that line. Very good and suitable for all sorts of variations.

:smirk:

You claim that Jesus died and atoned for both sheeps and goats, my version of the bible tells me other wise. You must be reading from the 'New Age' translation bible where Jesus bought the whole world on the cross therefore the whole world is now sinless

 

[Josiah]

So jesus died for the non elect?

According to Scripture, Jesus died for all. The Bible states that precisely, directly, literally, verbatim, often. And there is no Scripture (not one, not anywhere) that says "Jesus died for ONLY SOME."

So, for 1500+ years, 100% of Christians accepted and believed that. The Ecumenical Council of Orange (which dogmatized the doctrine of election) specifcally confirmed that. Then, along came a tiny few later-day radical Calvinists who invented an extremely tight, interconnected theory of TULIP and denied it. Although they are still looking for that verse that says "Jesus died for ONLY SOME and not all." But today, the only ones accepting this invention of some Calvinists are a tiny, tiny number of Calvinists (none personally known to me). Consider their saint, Dr. Sproul, who for 22 minutes dodges it and never once even states the dogma, "Jesus did not die for all but for ONLY SOME" and also can't find any verse that states that. He does admit this is the least accepted of the TULIP points in Calvinism.

so the non elect go to heaven? everyone goes to heaven!

Only if you join the radical Calvinists in repudiating faith, in insisting that faith has no role in justification, who insist that it's "Solus Christus" while rejecting Sola Gratia (which doesn't exist for most, they insist) and Sola Fide (because it's irrelevant)


Read John 3:16 etc. We hold to Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide. We hold that Sola Gratia by itself does not get anyone to heaven, that Solus Christus alone does not get anyone to heaven, that Sola Fide alone does not get anyone to heaven, Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide is ONE, united, inseparable truth. So, the radical Calvinists are wrong: the death of Jesus BY ITSELF does not justify. St. Paul is correct, this is "credited" to the individual by faith. Traditional, orthodox Christianity does no eject faith from justification.

there are some verses that say some will not go to heaven

Absolutely! And not one of them states this is because Jesus did NOT die for all (as the Bible so often, directly, literally states) but that He died for ONLY SOME.

The Ecumenical Council of Orange (which gave us the Doctrine of Predestination) states the election is related to who receives faith, NOT for whom Jesus died;.






.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You claim that Jesus died and atoned for both sheeps and goats, my version of the bible tells me other wise. You must be reading from the 'New Age' translation bible where Jesus bought the whole world on the cross therefore the whole world is now sinless

No, my bible is good, the problem is in your interpretation of the bible that you have.

 

[MoreCoffee]

MC, scripture speaks differently than you.

Another "well duh" moment in your posting history, Mennosota. Of course holy scripture speaks differently from me. That would be because holy scripture uses a very antiquated style of writing. I could emulate the style. Like this:

And the word of the Lord occurred to his servant MoreCoffee and it said "blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God". And MoreCoffee wrote down the words of the Lord which he found in the book of the gospels and he did say to Mennosota, behold this is the word of the Lord, Jesus the Christ, when he was on Earth among the people and preaching the message of God to them all. And his message was to all, to everyone who was pure of heart and to everyone who was meek and yes to many more who were of good faith. Thus MoreCoffee did remind Mennosota that the good news is spoken to all who hear it and is received only by those who hear with a good heart. So it is that many are called yet few are chosen said MoreCoffee to Mennosota but Mennosota did not understand.
​

 

[MennoSota]

Another "well duh" moment in your posting history, Mennosota. Of course holy scripture speaks differently from me. That would be because holy scripture uses a very antiquated style of writing. I could emulate the style. Like this:

And the word of the Lord occurred to his servant MoreCoffee and it said "blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God". And MoreCoffee wrote down the words of the Lord which he found in the book of the gospels and he did say to Mennosota, behold this is the word of the Lord, Jesus the Christ, when he was on Earth among the people and preaching the message of God to them all. And his message was to all, to everyone who was pure of heart and to everyone who was meek and yes to many more who were of good faith. Thus MoreCoffee did remind Mennosota that the good news is spoken to all who hear it and is received only by those who hear with a good heart. So it is that many are called yet few are chosen said MoreCoffee to Mennosota but Mennosota did not understand.
​

It would be because what you wrote is incorrect and not biblical.

 

[MoreCoffee]

It would be because what you wrote is incorrect and not biblical.

No, that is not the case; what I wrote is consistent with holy scripture and holy tradition as well as the magisterium of the Catholic Church, specifically Jesus Christ died for all as the holy scriptures - previously quoted with references - teach.

 

[MennoSota]

No, that is not the case; what I wrote is consistent with holy scripture and holy tradition as well as the magisterium of the Catholic Church, specifically Jesus Christ died for all as the holy scriptures - previously quoted with references - teach.

It is not consistent with scripture. It may very well be what your denomination teaches. However, you are proving that your denominations traditions are often not consistent with scripture.
If you wish to worship your church and imagine that in so doing you are worshipping God, I cannot stop you. I can only point out that your church is failing to follow scripture and thus its traditions are failing to worship God.

 

[atpollard]

According to Scripture, Jesus died for all. The Bible states that precisely, directly, literally, verbatim, often.

There are no concordance results for "Jesus" AND "died" AND "for" AND "all" in the ASV.
There are no concordance results for "Jesus" AND "died" AND "for" AND "all" in the ESV.
There are no concordance results for "Jesus" AND "died" AND "for" AND "all" in the KJV.
There are no concordance results for "Jesus" AND "died" AND "for" AND "all" in the NASB.
There are no concordance results for "Jesus" AND "died" AND "for" AND "all" in the NIV.
There are no concordance results for "Jesus" AND "died" AND "for" AND "all" in the NLT.
There are no concordance results for "Jesus" AND "died" AND "for" AND "all" in the RSV.

Scripture DOES NOT “precisely” or “directly” or “literally” or “verbatim” or “often” say “Jesus died for all”. In fact, the words “Jesus”, “died”, “for” and “all” do not appear together in any verse in any translation I searched. This is a far cry from your claim that the exact phrase “Jesus died for all” appears many times. You will need to be more careful with your claims; this one is false as you have presented it.

 

[Josiah]

Read what God literally says.... Read them all together.... Actually read (and believe) the words.....


First John 2:2

Hebrews 2:9

Titus 2:11

1 Timothy 4:10

John 3:14-16

John 4:42

Acts 2:21

Isaiah 53:6

2 Corinthians 5:14-15

1 Timothy 2:4

2 Peter 3:9

Read these.... together.... what impression do you get?

Now, consider, that in over 400 years, not one radical Calvinist has found even one verse that states Jesus died for only, exclusively, solely, just a limited, unnamed few.






.

 

[MoreCoffee]

It would be because what you wrote is incorrect and not biblical.

And MoreCoffee said to Mennosota; you have not the competence to discern that which is concordant with the holy scriptures nor to know what is correct. And MoreCoffee said to Mennosota Verily the doctrine that you preach has blinded you to what the holy scriptures say and by your doctrine you have made of no effect the very word of God for truly the holy scriptures explicitly say that Christ died for all. And opening the book of the new covenant MoreCoffee did show to Mennosota the passage from saint Paul's second letter to the Corinthians at the place where it is written:

For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all died; and he died for all, that they that live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him who for their sakes died and rose again.
2 Corinthians 5:14-15​

And MoreCoffee did say to Mennosota read and see that the Christ died for all according to the scriptures. But Mennosota would not neither would Mennosota interact with what was written in the holy scriptures but he would return to his doctrine and repeat it because for Mennosota the traditions of his forefathers in the sect of the Calvinist Baptists mattered more than the teaching of the Christ.

 

[atpollard]

Read what God literally says.... Read them all together.... Actually read (and believe) the words.....


First John 2:2

Hebrews 2:9

Titus 2:11

1 Timothy 4:10

John 3:14-16

John 4:42

Acts 2:21

Isaiah 53:6

2 Corinthians 5:14-15

1 Timothy 2:4

2 Peter 3:9

Read these.... together.... what impression do you get?

Now, consider, that in over 400 years, not one radical Calvinist has found even one verse that states Jesus died for only, exclusively, solely, just a limited, unnamed few.
.

None of those state “precisely, directly, literally, verbatim” that “Jesus died for all.”
A few actually have nothing to do with the topic, but my point was that you are being sloppy with your rhetoric and making false exaggerations. I have never claimed that there are no verses that claim Jesus’ death was for all. The issue becomes “who is all”?

If you ever want to discuss that verse by verse, let me know. Until then, don’t say the Bible says things “verbatim” that it does not say.