RANSOM FOR MANY OR ALL ?

[Lazy Suesun]

All.

 

[bbas 64]

It's impossible for a person to be alive and not have sin. So all persons 1-10 have sinned and need forgiveness...all their sins, past, present and future. The sin of unbelief is rejection of that forgiveness and nothing is received because the person rejects Him.

Good Day. Lil Lamb

I agree some what, but that does not answer the question.... you are moving the discussion out side of the text can we ask questions of the text That Josiah asked about see my post #15


1Jn 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

If there are 10 sins in the world in total... and only 10 people in the world

Person 1-9 commits a single sin that numbered 1-9, but the 10th person commits all 10 sins, how may people does Jesus have to atone for the sins of the whole world?

Did Jesus pay the ransom to the Father, to turn away the just Wrath of God for every single person with out distinction?

Or every sin (in the whole world)... they are 2 very different things.


In Him,

Bill

 

[bbas 64]

I say yes. It says it's SINS so all sins are included, and since the Bible says,"for all have sinned" that includes all people since all are sinners.


Here's a very short video from Dr. Cooper, a chaplain at Cornell... a former Calvinist now Lutheran. It's more didactic than my approach but it may help

.

.

Thanks My Brother listened to much of it ... not looking to get into a video posting war here...
He` does in fact quote this text.... so can we talk about it a bit?

Can we get back to the text.

1Jn 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

Yes all sins are included I agree... but not all sinners..... not the the context of Romans 3 can be read into 1 John as the Romans 3 has a much different context.

He paid the price for all sins in the world- Yes , but does not redeem all sinners... unless of course you feel his redeeming (paying the acceptable ransom price) work was unsuccessful.

Are there people in Hell today, that Jesus paid the ransom price ( to redeem) to the Father to appease the just wrath of God?

In Him

Bill

PS I would like to get to 1 Tim 2:4 at some point to ask about the sufficiency of Christ in is role as Mediator before the Father....

 

[bbas 64]

All.

All sins or all people in the context of 1 John....?

 

[Josiah]

1Jn 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

Yes all sins are included I agree... but not all sinners.....

I find that impossible. If the sins of most people are excluded, then not all sins are included, unless all for whom Christ did not die were sinless.

He paid the price for all sins in the world- Yes , but does not redeem all sinners...

No one at this website is a universalist; certainly not me.

We do have a radical Calvinist who seems to argue that faith is irrelevant to anything and thus if Christ died for one, ergo that one is saved whether or not they have faith (the position that caused many Calvinists to become universalists in the 17th and 18th Centuries - New England for example is full of Universalist Fellowships that were once strongly Calvinist churches, including the one at Plymouth founded by the Pilgrims). But nonetheless, he doesn't claim to be a universalist.

I agree with you: if there is no faith, there is no justification. But I find that entirely unrelated to whether Christ died for all. IMO, Christ DID die for all which means ALL who have faith are therefore grasping/trusting/relying on something real exists for them.

Are there people in Hell today, that Jesus paid the ransom price ( to redeem) to the Father?

Yup. All of them. But they are there not because Jesus didn't die for them but because they lacked faith. I hold to the Reformation view of Justification: Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide, not just Sola Gratia - Solus Christus. I reject that faith is irrelevant or that there is justification apart from faith.

Dr, Cooper gets into this point briefly in the video I shared, noting Scripture on this very point.



@Bill;

This is 36 minutes long and only audio, but Bill, I think this is quite insightful and helpful. If you have 36 minutes for this, this is good. https://issuesetc.org/2014/12/16/2-...sm-limited-atonement-pr-jordan-cooper-121614/




.

 

[Lazy Suesun]

All sins or all people in the context of 1 John....?

As in 1 Peter 3. And particularly with regard to verse 18.

 

[bbas 64]

As in 1 Peter 3. And particularly with regard to verse 18.

Good Day, Lazy Suesun


For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit,

All?

We have a pronoun "us" is that what you are referring to?

If so then can you point to the noun or pronoun that refers to

In HIm,

Bill

 

[Lamb]

Good Day. Lil Lamb

I agree some what, but that does not answer the question.... you are moving the discussion out side of the text can we ask questions of the text That Josiah asked about see my post #15


1Jn 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

If there are 10 sins in the world in total... and only 10 people in the world

Person 1-9 commits a single sin that numbered 1-9, but the 10th person commits all 10 sins, how may people does Jesus have to atone for the sins of the whole world?

Did Jesus pay the ransom to the Father, to turn away the just Wrath of God for every single person with out distinction?

Or every sin (in the whole world)... they are 2 very different things.


In Him,

Bill

I'm wondering if you believe in Original Sin? I guess that's what needs to be asked.

 

[hedrick]

No one at this website is a universalist; certainly not me.

I don't know whether I'm a universalist (because of Jesus' teachings), but I'm convinced that Paul was close. The primary reason is 1 Cor 15. But I think the argument that Paul says Christ died for everyone is really clear. While people have cited many relevant statements 1 Cor 15:22 seems particularly clear, unless you think Paul considered that only some people died in Adam.

But the problem with 1 Cor 15:22 is that it doesn't talk about some abstract redemption that you might or might not take advantage of. It says that all will be made alive in Christ. Of course this is about the future. It's obvious that not everyone is alive in Christ now.

It is possible that Paul has in mind that some humans are part of the hostile powers, and thus are destroyed in 15:24. But I don't see any way to read 15:22 that doesn't include a salvation that is not only universal but universally successful (with the possible exception of a few people who are part of the powers, and thus destroyed.)

Both Paul and Jesus have a supernatural view of the world, in which there are real supernatural powers fighting over the world. As in Eastern Orthodoxy, the implication of 1 Cor 15 is that humans are the victims of those powers, and when they are defeated, Christ will be all in all. This is not the typical Protestant vision of a salvation that God offers to us and most don't take it. This is a rescue.

 

[Particular]

... only if we accept your complete denial of Sola Fide and of any role of faith. But I hold to John 3:16, I hold to the biblical justification of Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide. I don't accept your "faith is useless, faith does nothing" view.

See 1 John 2:2. Read the words. Believe. Stop contradicting and denying them.

See Hebrews 2:9 Read the words. Believe. Stop contradicting and denying them.

See First Corinthians 5:14 Read the words. Stop contradicting and denying them.

See First Timothy 2:6. Read the words. Stop contradicting and denying them.






Still waiting




.

All the verses speaking for whom Christ died are for ALL the chosen people. You know this to be true because the Bible speaks of the chosen ones from Genesis to Revelation and Jesus confirms this in John 6, John 10 and John 17.
Now, make the "all" universal and you must either concede that all humans are saved or salvation is procured by human choice.
But, you are lazy with interpretation and scripture. You merely quote and ignore context. Do all LCMS person's do what you do or are you an anomaly?

Second, if faith is given by gift of God (and I believe the Bible teaches this), why do you support the loss of faith by human means? Did Jesus lie when he said he would keep all that the Father has given him?

 

[hedrick]

I should note that both commentaries I checked on 1 Cor assume that Paul is following a common Jewish belief, in which only the righteous rise. If so, and the full effects of Christ's death are eschatological, then it could be universal, but only applying to those who are present at the end.

I suppose if Paul could assume that his readers would understand this background, then 15:22 might not be as universal as it sounds. But to the extent that it's universal, it seems like it's talking about salvation, and not just the possibility of salvation.

A third commentary maintains that Paul did not mean that Adam and Christ are parallel, but only partly.

However those exegeses fall into the category that sound great in the commentary, but I find it a bit hard to believe when I go back to the text.

 

[Lazy Suesun]

Good Day, Lazy Suesun


For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit,

All?

We have a pronoun "us" is that what you are referring to?

If so then can you point to the noun or pronoun that refers to

In HIm,

Bill

I would suggest that "our" in 1 Peter 3:18 is a new entry as per the possessive case "our", (sins). The original Greek did not provide a pronoun form.
1 Peter 3





αμαρτανω αμαρτια

 

[Lazy Suesun]

Re: original sin, as I saw that topic posed to another member. We're told by one man sin entered the world.
Does that mean all newborns are condemned with original sin?
Or do we consider the teaching of Ezekiel 18:20?

 

[Particular]

Re: original sin, as I saw that topic posed to another member. We're told by one man sin entered the world.
Does that mean all newborns are condemned with original sin?
Or do we consider the teaching of Ezekiel 18:20?

Yes, all person's are born under the curse of sin and are corrupt in sin by nature.

You have to read all of Ezekiel 18 to understand verse 20. But, I will only quote the first verses as they ultimately explain why verse 20 is written.

Ezekiel 18:2-4,20

(vs2)“What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’?

(vs3)As I live, declares the Lord God, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.

(vs20)The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

The young people who were in exile in Babylon were complaining that God was punishing them for the sins of their ancestors. They thought God was unfair. God sets them straight and ultimately shows that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

 

[Josiah]

All the verses speaking for whom Christ died are for ALL the chosen people.

Would you please quote the verse(s) that state, "Jesus died only for the chosen people." You know, the invention in the 16th Century of a few radical Calvinists typically known as "LIMITED atonement."




.

 

[Lazy Suesun]

Yes, all person's are born under the curse of sin and are corrupt in sin by nature.

You have to read all of Ezekiel 18 to understand verse 20. But, I will only quote the first verses as they ultimately explain why verse 20 is written.

Ezekiel 18:2-4,20

(vs2)“What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’?

(vs3)As I live, declares the Lord God, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.

(vs20)The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

The young people who were in exile in Babylon were complaining that God was punishing them for the sins of their ancestors. They thought God was unfair. God sets them straight and ultimately shows that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

Sin is of and within the world. We do not inherit a sin nature from Adam.By Adam sin entered the world not his ancestral human race.
If we are born sinners, then the newborn that dies hours after birth would be condemned to Hell.

Further, Ezekiel's teaching tells us that is not so. Not possible. When we are accountable for our choices and act contrary to the good, that is when we become accountable for our actions, sins. We are imperfect because sin entered the world through one man , due to one tree in the creation God looked upon and on the 6th day judged it all very good. We are not born sinners because if we were we'd be born damned by the will of God who gives life. And takes it away. All due to his will and zeal for his own glory. (all scripture)

 

[Josiah]

Sin is of and within the world. We do not inherit a sin nature from Adam.By Adam sin entered the world not his ancestral human race.
If we are born sinners, then the newborn that dies hours after birth would be condemned to Hell.

1. While I realize the issue of sin IS an issue here.... and the Calvinist position COULD be seen as dependent on most people not being sinners... but in my view, a discussion of Original Sin is a big topic that needs a dedicated thread.

2. "The wages of sin is death." "Death entered because of sin." While what is meant by "death" there is a matter of differing views, it could be argued that if humans cannot have a sinful nature until they have first celebrated their "Xth" birthday, then it could be argued none would die before that - and yet THE most likely time most humans in history have died is before the age of one (often, before birth). And even if that is changed to "they have a sinful nature BUT aren't held accountable for it" then the very thing the Bible says "death is the result of sin" would be unjust, many (even unborn) ARE being held accountable before that have first celebrated that (never disclosed mysterious) birthday.

BUT lazy Suesun, IF you want to pursue that issue, I suspect there are (inactive) threads on it.... or just start a new one. But actually, traditional Reformed theology DOES accept original sin.... and I think that I Lamm's point when she brought this into this thread.... our Calvinist friend's position that Jesus died for all SINS but not for all people DOES seem to run into a problem there; it seems to mandate most people are void of any sinful nature (and thus are equals of God in terms of righteousness).





.

 

[Lazy Suesun]

1. While I realize the issue of sin IS an issue here.... and the Calvinist position COULD be seen as dependent on most people not being sinners... but in my view, a discussion of Original Sin is a big topic that needs a dedicated thread.

2. "The wages of sin is death." "Death entered because of sin." While what is meant by "death" there is a matter of differing views, it could be argued that if humans cannot have a sinful nature until they have first celebrated their "Xth" birthday, then it could be argued none would die before that - and yet THE most likely time most humans in history have died is before the age of one (often, before birth). And even if that is changed to "they have a sinful nature BUT aren't held accountable for it" then the very thing the Bible says "death is the result of sin" would be unjust, many (even unborn) ARE being held accountable before that have first celebrated that (never disclosed mysterious) birthday.

BUT lazy Suesun, IF you want to pursue that issue, I suspect there are (inactive) threads on it.... or just start a new one. But actually, traditional Reformed theology DOES accept original sin.... and I think that I Lamm's point when she brought this into this thread.... our Calvinist friend's position that Jesus died for all SINS but not for all people DOES seem to run into a problem there; it seems to mandate most people are void of any sinful nature (and thus are equals of God in terms of righteousness).





.

I entered a thread that is already underway. I don't need to seek out another thread as I am on topic.

I am not a Calvinist. I find Calvinism to be contrary to the Gospel. I think that the rise of Denominational allegiances is what has fractured the body of the church that Emmanuel died to unite together under the grace of God's good news. And I think that is why there is conflict and debate as to what it means to be saved and be in Christ. Unfortunately, what tends to happen in cases of that nature is those in line with a particular denomination defend what the denomination holds as true. Calvinism is one example even though it may not be considered a denomination, it has formed through taking the Gospel out of context so as to manufacture an elitist exemplar that ascribes salvation as that which was predetermined for the individual whom God chose to save before the world came to exist. Which then makes for the question, why then did God have to arrive with the Good News of Salvation when everyone he intended to save were already pre-selected before the world where sin would enter and make necessary Salvation from it, came to exist? There's actually no rational Biblically oriented in right context answer.

Original Sin was due to Adam's disobedience. By one man sin entered the world. And by that act did death enter the world through sin. Sin being defined by God then makes all people imperfect by nature. That sin is in our world and we are able to die means our carnal nature, not a divine nature, makes us susceptible to the worlds faults. It does not mean a newborn is a born sinner damned the moment they take their first breath.
It means that having a carnal nature alive in a world where sin exists, and the lord of this world roaming about as a hungry lion seeking souls to devour, will make for our failing to live up to the righteousness God expects when we're old enough to choose to act knowing the difference and the consequence between right and wrong. Whatever age that is, as some people mature faster than others.

However, newborns, babies, and infant children are not so equipped and as such are not sinners subject to damnation. If they were Emmanuel erred when , in giving the parable of Salvation and Heaven, told his Disciples they must become like little children in order to enter the Kingdom.

If little children are born damned, then the whole world is headed for the Kingdom.
I don't share my belief in order or in the hopes of, changing someones mind about their own beliefs. I will never accept that babies are born damned, and infant and children will see Hell because they are damned at birth due to the stain of Adam's original sin that mars them. That is not in the Bible and in fact contradicts what is. And, it makes God out to be worse than the Devil for having created life to come into the world only to knowingly assure it will perish in Hell for eternity the moment that newborns heart stops.
I'd rather be an atheist than believe that lie about God. That too is my view. For those who ascribe to that, that's between them and God. Now and at the judgment.
Just as my beliefs are to be met in that same way.

 

[atpollard]

Sufficient for all and effective for some.

 

[Josiah]

Sufficient for all and effective for some.

"Effective for some" is an interesting Calvinist twist on the "L". Dr. Cooper mentions this new spin in the video I conveyed to BBAS 64.

Of course, it just circumvents the issue - whether Jesus died for all people (as the Bible and 2000 years of Christianity teach) OR just for some minority of such. But yes, not everyone goes to heaven. So, you can "connect" the two - but to do so is misleading since it continues the "faith is irrelevant" argument. His Sacrifice does not result in everyone going to heaven, but this is not because Jesus didn't die for them but because they lack faith to apprehend/rely upon such. The lack of faith is the issue, not the lack of Jesus' work.

Let's say in my amazing grace I buy you a 2020 Corvette. Now have I done that? Yes. For you? Yes. But never do you sign the paperwork and pick up the keys or register the vehicle. Do you benefit from it? Is it "effectual" to you? No. But is that because I offered you something I don't have for you? No. What is being offered is THERE for you. You simply lack the faith (apprehending, trusting, receiving) that means it IS effectual/beneficial to you.



.