Jesus died for the sins of the world

[Josiah]

Wow.

I can just imagine the way some people must think Jesus should have addressed the masses.

"Come unto me, you who are weary and heavy laden, and I will help a miniscule few of you while mocking the rest."

AND He goofed SO badly in John 3:16!! Down right heretical! What Jesus SHOULD have said is, "For God so loved just a few people (probably not you) that He gave His only begotten Son just to them (odds are, not you) so that whether they believe in what He likely never did for them or not, it couldn't matter less because faith is a joke - those few will not perish, but God won't tell you who those fortunate few are."


.

 

[1689Dave]

AND He goofed SO badly in John 3:16!! Down right heretical! What Jesus SHOULD have said is, "For God so loved just a few people (probably not you) that He gave His only begotten Son just to them (odds are, not you) so that whether they believe in what He likely never did for them or not, it couldn't matter less because faith is a joke - those few will not perish, but God won't tell you who those fortunate few are."


.

Your problem is you need to interpret scripture as the audience to whom it is addressed would. You miss it completely thinking like a 21st-century American. Why would you ignore the promise to Abraham and substitute your Americanised mind in place of a first-century Jew if I'm not right?

 

[Josiah]

Your problem is .....

You seem unable or unwilling to READ. SO often, you think the words on the page have no meaning, no significance, no relevance (even if it's God's words). YOU must "interpret" them - which seems to be, you need to CORRECT them. You "read" what is correct - even if it's the opposite of what is actually stated. You appear to have a PROFOUND disrespect for God and His words. Or simply can't read.



.

 

[1689Dave]

You seem unable or unwilling to READ. SO often, you think the words on the page have no meaning, no significance, no relevance (even if it's God's words). YOU must "interpret" them - which seems to be, you need to CORRECT them. You "read" what is correct - even if it's the opposite of what is actually stated. You appear to have a PROFOUND disrespect for God and His words. Or simply can't read.



.

What about? “Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:” Romans 9:20–22 (KJV 1900)

 

[tango]

AND He goofed SO badly in John 3:16!! Down right heretical! What Jesus SHOULD have said is, "For God so loved just a few people (probably not you) that He gave His only begotten Son just to them (odds are, not you) so that whether they believe in what He likely never did for them or not, it couldn't matter less because faith is a joke - those few will not perish, but God won't tell you who those fortunate few are."


.

Yep, good old half-wit God. Not only did he get that all wrong but when Jesus said to go into the world and preach to every creature he was just having us on. He might as well have said "Go into the world, have a good laugh at the people who listen to your message even though it's a complete waste of their time because none of this applies to them"

When he talked of separating the sheep from the goats he should have said to the goats something more like "Ha, you thought you were in with a chance? Too bad.... I hope you got good fire insurance".

 

[brightfame52]

Yep, good old half-wit God. Not only did he get that all wrong but when Jesus said to go into the world and preach to every creature he was just having us on. He might as well have said "Go into the world, have a good laugh at the people who listen to your message even though it's a complete waste of their time because none of this applies to them"

When he talked of separating the sheep from the goats he should have said to the goats something more like "Ha, you thought you were in with a chance? Too bad.... I hope you got good fire insurance".

The Primary reason for Christ sending preachers into world was so that the elect would be informed of their Salvation, to bring them to faith and evangelical obedience Rom 15:18

For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed,

Now secondarily the Gospel is sent out to be a witness against false religion and a judgment against them. The Gospel is designed to be a savor of death unto death for some 2 Cor 2:14-16

14 Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place.

15 For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:

16 To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?

God considers His Gospel a Sweet Savour whether its believed or not, His Purposes stand with it.

 

[1689Dave]

Yep, good old half-wit God. Not only did he get that all wrong but when Jesus said to go into the world and preach to every creature he was just having us on. He might as well have said "Go into the world, have a good laugh at the people who listen to your message even though it's a complete waste of their time because none of this applies to them"

When he talked of separating the sheep from the goats he should have said to the goats something more like "Ha, you thought you were in with a chance? Too bad.... I hope you got good fire insurance".

You have a false gospel that you hold up and attack. The true gospel has nothing to do with your take on it.

 

[Doran]

The will is not free where salvation is concerned because man is spiritually dead until God gives him new life.

Man's will is bound to sin because of the fall of Adam. We are already condemned and there we stay until by grace through faith we believe that our sins are forgiven. This doesn't come from within us but all God's doing. Why some and why not others is NOT told in scripture which is why we can safely say that God saves and man is condemned to hell because of his rejection of the Gospel.

We can't go out and spread the Gospel if it weren't objectively already true...that Jesus died for all. God wants us to go out and spread the good news so we CAN safely say that He died for YOU!

I disagree on a few points. First, fallen mankind's will is free to choose within the constraints of our fallen nature. If we say that sinners don't have free will to make choices according to our nature, then we'd have to deny that God doesn't have free will, since Scripture teaches that He cannot be tempted, cannot sin, cannot lie, cannot deny himself, etc. Just because God cannot be profane or unrighteous doesn't mean his will isn't free to choose within the constraints of his holy nature.

Secondly, there is no passage in scripture that teaches that Christ died for all men in a distributive sense, i.e. without exception. The scriptures do teach, however, that Christ died for all men without distinction, i.e. without regard to race, ethnicity, social standing, gender, etc. See 1Tim 4:10; Rev 5:9, etc. This last passage is particularly crystal clear, for it does not say that "with your blood you purchased" EVERY MAN for God.

Thirdly, universal atonement presents several serious theological problems and would produce numerous contradictions in the bible.

 

[Doran]

God gives nonbelievers faith and they believe. He does so by His word.

AND by his Holy Spirit (Jn 11:26). Note that LIFE logically and biblically precedes faith. Therefore, since only the spiritually living can believe, regeneration by the Holy Spirit must precede faith. A person believes the Gospel, responds positively it because of God's sovereign grace in giving that person life in the Spirit.

 

[Josiah]

The Primary reason for Christ sending preachers into world was so that the elect would be informed of their Salvation, to bring them to faith and evangelical obedience Rom 15:18

@brightfame52


Nowhere does the Bible state to share the Gospel only with the Elect.

Not only does that NEVER appear in the Bible, but it would make evangelism IMPOSSIBLE since there is no way to know who is and is not the Elect. The Bible does not list their names, they don't have some big red dot on their heads from birth, there's no way for any to know who is and is not the Elect.

But at least you are honest about the effects of this anti-Calvin invention, "Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY for some unknown few." Yes, it means it's dishonest (at best) to share the Gospel with most people since it's not for them. Lying to say God loves them, forgiveness is available to them - cuz it's probably not. When a pastor preaches a sermon, he'd need to state "For most of you, none of this is true - and I don't know which of you that is."

A blessed Advent to you and yours.




.

 

[Lamb]

AND by his Holy Spirit (Jn 11:26). Note that LIFE logically and biblically precedes faith. Therefore, since only the spiritually living can believe, regeneration by the Holy Spirit must precede faith. A person believes the Gospel, responds positively it because of God's sovereign grace in giving that person life in the Spirit.

God's Holy Spirit is not separated from the word...so when God gives faith, He gives life. It's simultaneous.

 

[Albion]

Brightfame52 said:

The Primary reason for Christ sending preachers into world was so that the elect would be informed of their Salvation, to bring them to faith and evangelical obedience Rom 15:18

What nonsense. The verse you have cited doesn't say anything of the sort. It says that Paul recognized that his role was to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles.

 

[tango]

The Primary reason for Christ sending preachers into world was so that the elect would be informed of their Salvation, to bring them to faith and evangelical obedience Rom 15:18

For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed,

Now secondarily the Gospel is sent out to be a witness against false religion and a judgment against them. The Gospel is designed to be a savor of death unto death for some 2 Cor 2:14-16

14 Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place.

15 For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:

16 To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?

God considers His Gospel a Sweet Savour whether its believed or not, His Purposes stand with it.

It's a hugely inefficient way to do things, sending people into the world to preach to "every creature" when the overwhelming majority of those creatures aren't even capable of responding to the message being preached. It would seem less productive than sending people into Los Angeles to tell people why they should vote Republican.

But hey, might as well preach a message that is utterly useless to the majority, right? It might have been more useful to send a few out to speak specifically to the elect. They might be marked in some way so the preachers can see who it's worth talking to.

On another note, why do the elect even need to know they are the elect? If they are the elect how does it help being told who they are, even aside from the apparent lack of anything to indicate who is and who is not among the elect? If the message of salvation is only for the elect, the elect are saved anyway, and nobody knows which people make up the elect, what is the benefit in preaching at all? The ones that are saved don't need the message, the ones that aren't saved won't benefit from the message, and nobody knows which group are which anyway.

 

[MoreCoffee]

AND by his Holy Spirit (Jn 11:26). Note that LIFE logically and biblically precedes faith. Therefore, since only the spiritually living can believe, regeneration by the Holy Spirit must precede faith. A person believes the Gospel, responds positively it because of God's sovereign grace in giving that person life in the Spirit.

God's Holy Spirit is not separated from the word...so when God gives faith, He gives life. It's simultaneous.

I've never really understood the necessity to define what happens first in the salvation of human beings when the holy scriptures never say

First God elects you​

next God gives you faith​

then you're saved!​

Of course God initiates everything, so to speak, because he created everything.

For, like a tiny grain on a scale, just so is the world before you, and like a drop dew before dawn, which descends upon the earth. But you are merciful to all, because you can do all, and you dismiss the sins of man because of repentance. For you love all things that are, and you hate nothing of the things you have made; for you would not have created or established anything that you hated. For how could anything endure, except by your will? Or what, having been called by you not to exist, would be preserved? Yet you spare all things, because they are yours, O Lord, who loves souls. Wisdom 11:23-27​

And every creation does in fact respond to God's work of creation.

Yet this insistence on a definite order for election, faith, works, salvation is kind of obsessive.
Why not accept that God initiates, people respond, and God saves.
Let the order and whatever else seems essential to some system of theology give way to the mystery of God's infinity and humanity's finiteness?

 

[tango]

@brightfame52


Nowhere does the Bible state to share the Gospel only with the Elect.

Not only does that NEVER appear in the Bible, but it would make evangelism IMPOSSIBLE since there is no way to know who is and is not the Elect. The Bible does not list their names, they don't have some big red dot on their heads from birth, there's no way for any to know who is and is not the Elect.

Perhaps God just likes to watch us wasting our time.

Perhaps he sends people to go out as missionaries into some primitive area, facing all sorts of risks, to spread a message that won't benefit a single person in the area because none of them are among the elect.

 

[Albion]

Your problem is you need to interpret scripture as the audience to whom it is addressed would. You miss it completely thinking like a 21st-century American. Why would you ignore the promise to Abraham and substitute your Americanised mind in place of a first-century Jew if I'm not right?

Oh, come off it.

There is no way that "ALL'' and "THE WORLD" are "Americanised" [sic] terms used in place of the authentic meaning which supposedly is "NOT ALL" and "THE PLANET" excluding people!

 

[prism]

@prism

The issue here is not whether all are given faith. The issue here is not faith at all. No one here claims that all are given faith. And only Dave has claimed that faith is irrelevant and unnecessary for personal justification. Yes, God does NOT give faith to all. Everyone here agrees with that.


The issue here is whether Scripture is correct when it repeatedly, verbatim, in black-and-white words states "Jesus died for all." Dave insists that's not true, the opposite is true. But he has not been able to find anything in Scripture that states that all those Scriptures are wrong, not anything tht states what he does, that Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some unknown few.

Those of us who hold that it's true that "Jesus died for all" (as so many Scriptures clearly, undeniably STATES) are in accord with the Bible, with the Church Fathers, with a Church Council, with over 1500 years of Christianity. Even with John Calvin. In agreement with the Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, the Methodist Church, most Baptists churches and well beyond. FEW are the folks who declare that God is simply wrong in what He so often, undeniably, in black-and-white STATES... and that the exact opposite is true. And it leads them to some horrible things: They can't present the Gospel to anyone (because it's probably not for them), they can't know if God loves them or forgives them or if salvation is even available for them, or even if a loved one is in heaven. In all those cases, it's probably not true because all that is for a FEW and Jesus never gave a list of who it's for.




.

One can argue about Christ dying for all, all they want, but 2000 years of blindness upon the Jews doesn’t add up in practical terms. IOW, If he died for ALL, why did He blind some?

 

[tango]

Oh, come off it.

There is no way that "ALL' and "THE WORLD" are "Americanized" [sic] terms for the authentic meaning which supposedly is "NOT ALL" and "THE PLANET," not people!

It must be one of those "dog whistles" we keep hearing about.

You know, where a phrase means one thing but also apparently means something totally different to a select yet mostly undefined group but nobody can prove what or why (or indeed how the secret group knows what it really means) so they just make assertions without evidence.

 

[Josiah]

It's a hugely inefficient way to do things, sending people into the world to preach to "every creature" when the overwhelming majority of those creatures aren't even capable of responding to the message being preached.

@brightfame52
@prism

Tango, it's WORSE than that.

It's LYING to them. For a pastor to preach the Gospel on a Sunday morning to a congregation where the odds are, most aren't the Elect, well, he either must be dishonest, holding out a false promise or he'd need to state at the end of each sermon (and also each Bible reading and hymn), "Sorry, but this probably doesn't apply to most of you because odds are, you are not among the Elect."

Before a Missionary could say or do anything, he must ask the person, "What proof do you have that you are among the Elect?" If no such proof is given, he cannot share the Gospel with that person without probably lying to them. A parent cannot tell their child the true meaning of Christmas since a parent has no way to know if their child is among the elect (odds are, they aren't) - sharing Christ was born for them is likely lying (which is a sin).

These proponents of this horrible, anti-Calvin invention insist we can only share the Gospel with the Elect. Problem is, God didn't list their names in the Bible and God didn't put a big red dot on the forehead of all who are Elect. These anti-Calvin folks might say, "Well, we preach the Gospel and IF they accept it, THEN we know they were among the Elect" but.... even if such is true....it means they are lying most of the time, holding out a FALSE promise, preaching a FALSE Gospel since it's not for them. They aren't JUST "wasting their time" they are lying and sharing a false Gospel.




.

 

[Josiah]

One can argue about Christ dying for all, all they want, but 2000 years of blindness upon the Jews doesn’t add up in practical terms. IOW, If he died for ALL, why did He blind some?

1. Questions aren't substantiation.

2. The Bible states (repeatedly) that Jesus died for all. It also indicates that not all have faith. The Bible does not state why not all have faith, but that is the case.

3. Just because the Bible is correct when it repeatedly says Christ died for all, and the Bible is correct when it repeatedly states that not all have faith does not prove that the Bible is wrong.




.