Well, I will ask you: Where in scripture does it say that the term "world" or even "whole world", for that matter = each and every person without exception? Or are you just reading your presupposition into such passages? Apparently, you are not aware of the numerous passages that qualify God's love? I'll give you but one for you to chew on for now; but there are a lot more from where that came:
@Doran
Here are the two positions:
1. Jesus died for all people.
Here are just a few of the Scriptures that state this view. The view echos them, verbatim.
1 John 2:2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
John 3:16 “For God so loved
the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Hebrews 2:9 But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death
for everyone.
2 Corinthians 5:14 For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has
died for all
John 1:29 The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin
of the world!
2 Corinthians 5:15 And
he died for all
2 Corinthians 5:19 That is, in Christ God was reconciling
the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.
1 Timothy 2:6 Who gave himself as a ransom
for all.
and many more just like the above.
+ This view does NOT hold that all individuals have personal justification since that requires a second aspect, the divine gift of faith. BOTH the CROSS and FAITH are 100% the work and gift of God and together they bring justification (narrow sense) to the individual.
+ This view simply echos those words from the Bible. It doesn't explain anything, it doesn't deny anything, it affirms one point: Jesus died for all. It echos verbatim what God so often stated.
+ It is the view of the Early Church Fathers, of the Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, the Methodist Church, most Baptist churches and Evangelical churches and nearly all other denominations and faith communities. It was declared doctrine by a Church Council in the 9th Century. It was the view of John Calvin.
2. No, Jesus did NOT die for all people but ONLY for some unknown few.
Here are the Scriptures that state this view:
Crickets.
+ For God to be wrong in all those MANY Scriptures that specifically, verbatim, in black-and-white words all who can read see, that Jesus died for all.... don't you need Scriptures (perhaps an equal number) that specifically, verbatim, in black-and-white words all who can read see, that Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY for some unknown few?"
+ There is a verse that says "Jesus died for the Elect" but none that say ONLY for the Elect. And there are verses that state that Jesus died for us (Christians) but none that state ONLY for us (indeed, see
1 John 2:2). And without the "only" the point is unsubstantiated. Apologists of this view must employ a silly logical fallacy, one illustrated by this: "Ford makes Mustangs, ergo Ford ONLY makes Mustangs." Or "Bob loves his wife, ergo he ONLY loves his wife and not his kids." Even my four year old son can see the absurdity of the logical fallacy radical, extremist Calvinists use as their apologetic for this invention. The whole apologetic has not one Scripture that states their point. It's based entirely on a logical fallacy.
+ And of course if this horrible invention is true, then no one can know if Jesus' death is for THEM (odds are, it's not). And no way to know if their trust in that death for THEM means anything at all since they can't know if it was for them (probably not).
Radical Calvinists (who actually repudiate Calvin on this point) invented this dogma in response to Arminianists (who embrace some forms of synergism and Pelagianism) and necessitates the opposition having those views. It doesn't work at all on people who aren't Arminianists. It's based on NOT ONE VERSE in Scripture (so much for Sola Scriptura) and on a fallacy that permits them to INSERT the word "only" into texts, the logical fallacy that is the entire basis of their apologetic is like this: "Ford makes Mustangs, ergo Ford ONLY makes Mustangs." Their entire apologetic rests on this logical fallacy. And the absence of any Scripture that states it.
Ex 20:4-6
4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand [ generations] of those who love me and keep my commandments.
NIV
It does not say "ONLY."
Romans 5:8, "God shows His love for us in that while we were His enemies, Christ died for us."
1 John 2:2, "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for our sins only but also for the sins of the whole world."
Yes, "love" can be used in the sense of phileo (to approve, to like) and this is, in some ways, the opposite of "hate." But love also can be used in the sense of agape - love that simply flows from the one who loves and is not necessarily earned (as in loving our enemies). Some express this as "God hates everyone for everyone is a sinner, and God loves everyone for God is love."
And of course, we are commanded to love all (even our enemies), so it seems odd that Jesus would command us to do what He does not.
But we are on a tangent. The point of discussion is whether Jesus died for all (as the Bible so often verbatim states) or if that's wrong and Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some unknown few (as the Bible never states). My point was that if this anti-Calvin theory is correct, then it's misleading and deceptive (at best) to proclaim the Gospel to people if we do not KNOW that they are among the Elect.
.
Say what?
