Jesus died for the sins of the world

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
What would be the point of Christ dying then?
It's what I have contended all along. The Atonement effected by Christ and the reception of Faith by a new believer are two separate things.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
@prism

The "problem" with J.I.Packer's point is ...

1) He offers not one Scripture that states what he does, that Jesus died for ONLY _______.

2) His whole apologetic rests on a heresy that faith is irrelevant.
J. I. Packer was a longtime writer, so the obvious question now would be "How do you know that 'he offers not one Scripture that states what he does'" and/or that "his whole apologetic rests on...faith is irrelevant?"

I couldn't say that (as I already indicated) without having read everything he ever wrote, so how is it that you can?

And by the way, I HAVE read enough of his writings to know that it's absurd to claim that "his whole apologetic rests on a heresy that faith is irrelevant!"
 
Last edited:

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
J. I. Packer was a longtime writer, so the obvious question now would be "How do you know that 'he offers not one Scripture that states what he does'" and/or that "his whole apologetic rests on...faith is irrelevant?"


I am replying to the quote supplied. There he does not offer one Scripture that states that Jesus died ONLY for ____________. But as we all know, there is no verse that states that so I don't think it's beyond reason to think he nowhere quotes the verse(s) that state that. But again, I'm responding to the quote offered. He does reference a number of Scriptures in the quote offered, but none that states that he does, "Christ did not die for all."



And by the way, I HAVE read enough of his writings to know that claiming that "his whole apologetic rests on a heresy that faith is irrelevant" is nonsense! .


Perhaps. But that IS the apologetic he offers in the quote. This is, verbatim, exactly what he states in the quote: "Christ did not die for everyone. The proof of that is that not all are saved." No mention of faith whatsoever, no role for faith at all. What he states is, "Christ did not die for everyone." And his apologetic is singular and focused, "The proof is that not all are saved."


IF Packer is ONLY saying that the death benefits those with faith, then of course he's agreeing with traditional, orthodox Christianity (and what some Calvinists call "Universal Atonement") and disagreeing with prism who quotes him. But then that disagrees with what he states, "Christ did not die for everyone. The proof is that not all are saved." Now, ELSEWHERE Packer may have said something very different, even opposite, of what he states in the quote offered but we're discussing the quote offered (I simply have not read everything he's written).

Make sense?


Blessings!


- Josiah



.
 
Last edited:

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I am replying to the quote supplied.
Then how did you get "His whole apologetic rests on a heresy that faith is irrelevant" from this statement of Packer's--

"It is a certain truth that all who come to Christ in faith will find mercy (JOHN 6:35,47-51,54-57; Rom. 1:16, 10:8-13)."

???

and from this--

"Both the invitation and the effectual calling flow from Christ's sin-bearing death. Those who reject the offer of Christ do so of their own free will (i.e., because they choose to, Matt. 22:1-7; JOHN 3:18)"

???
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
@Albion The apologetic he offers in the quote is, verbatim: "Christ did not die for everyone. The proof of that is that not all are saved." No mention of faith whatsoever, no role for faith at all. What he states is, "Christ did not die for everyone." And his apologetic is singular and focused, "The proof is that not all are saved."

Again, IF Packer is ONLY saying that the death benefits those with faith (his death being universal, faith not being so), then of course he's agreeing with traditional, orthodox Christianity (and what some Calvinists call "Universal Atonement") and disagreeing with prism who quotes him. But then that disagrees with what he states, "Christ did not die for everyone. The proof is that not all are saved." If Christ died for all then why does he state Christ did not die for all? And if the determining factor as to why not all are saved is faith, why does he state that the proof (that some are not saved) is that Christ did not die for them? Now, ELSEWHERE Packer may have said something very different, even opposite, of what he states in the quote offered but we're discussing the quote offered (I simply have not read everything he's written).

At BEST, the quote here is very difficult. But again, he does verbatim, clearly, flat out state "Jesus did not die for all" and he gives the "proof" (his apologetic) that not all are saved. ELSEWHERE, in writings not quoted here, perhaps he was more clear as to his position. But this quote seems pretty clear: "Jesus did not die for all, the proof is that not all are saved."


Blessings!


Josiah



.



.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Now, ELSEWHERE Packer may have said something very different, even opposite, of what he states in the quote offered but we're discussing the quote offered (I simply have not read everything he's written).
No, you who don't know Packer have chosen to call one of recent history's most renowned theologians a "heretic" on the basis of a snippet posted by our colleague "Prism." And what Prism posted was this:

That was the reference Prism offered and to which you replied by labelling Packer a heretic.

That link, Packer's essay, is the material I quoted from in my response to you a few minutes ago. It absolutely rules out the idea that "faith is irrelevant."
 
Last edited:

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
the doctrine states that the death of Christ actually put away the sins of all God's elect and ensured that they would be brought to faith through regeneration and kept in faith for glory, and that this is what it was intended to achieve
J I Packer's comment, above, is a faithful accurate representation of the L of TULIP.

It is hard to differentiate this L description from saying that Christ's death is effective for all who believe the gospel acting on that belief faithfully.
 

prism

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
711
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
@prism

The "problem" with J.I.Packer's point is ...

1) He offers not one Scripture that states what he does, that Jesus died for ONLY _______.

2) His whole apologetic rests on a heresy that faith is irrelevant. He states, "Christ did not die for everyone. The proof of that is that not all are saved." So for him, there is only ONE factor: the death of Jesus, if Jesus died for you you are personally justified, if not then you aren't. Thus the entirety of his apologetic: the fact that all are not saved is "proof" that Christ did not die for all. This is the same apologetic used by 1689Dave and Doran, the same heresy that faith is irrelevant and unnecessary.



.
Faith may be necessary insofar as it is both required and produced in the elect.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Faith may be necessary insofar as it is both required and produced in the elect.

I agree, faith is essential to personal justification. And I agree, faith is not universal (not present in all).

But the issue here is the Cross, did Christ die for all or ONLY for ________________.



.
 

prism

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
711
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I agree, faith is essential to personal justification. And I agree, faith is not universal (not present in all).

But the issue here is the Cross, did Christ die for all or ONLY for ________________.



.
I suppose it comes down to semantics.
Since there is an elect , outside of which none are saved, it might as well be said Christ died for His elect...not 'all'.
 

Faith

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
1,140
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Primitive Baptist? They don't even require any formal training of their pastors. No wonder I never heard of that type of belief. It sounds as if they believe that God created two different creations.

Why would God create two different creations of humans?
I, for one, want a pastor with formal training. When I was searching for a church, one church I kind of liked is run by a pastor with no training. I passed.
 

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
32,649
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I, for one, want a pastor with formal training. When I was searching for a church, one church I kind of liked is run by a pastor with no training. I passed.

That was a wise decision. Not everyone is equipped...even the disciples were trained for 3 years.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I suppose it comes down to semantics.

@prism


No. One position is that Christ did NOT die for all and the other is that Christ DID die for all. The difference isn't "just semantics" the difference is real. It's not "just semantics."


Here are just some of the Scriptures that verbatim, flat-out, literally STATE that Jesus died for all. for everyone, for the whole world:

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.

There are several more.


Here are the Scriptures that state, "No, Jesus did not die for all but rather ONLY for ______________."



Crickets.



Since there is an elect , outside of which none are saved, it might as well be said Christ died for His elect...not 'all'.


Except that's wrong. That contradicts Scripture, a Church Council, and 2000 years of Christian faith.


And IF Scripture is wrong (so often) and never gets it right.... if Jesus died ONLY for some unknown some... then no one can be told that God loves them, no one can be presented with the Gospel (unless we make it clear this probably doesn't apply to them)... no one can be told that forgiveness is available for them. And of course, no one can know if the Cross is FOR THEM (odds are, it's not). We KNOW that Christ died for us (for you, for me) for only one reason: The Bible states (so often, so boldly) that Jesus died for all people, I'm a people (LOL) so therefore..... Friend, there is no list in Scripture of the lucky few for whom Jesus died.

There's a very fundamental reason why Scripture makes this point so often, so clearly, so boldly. Why Christianity has stressed it for so long. Why the Council declared it as de fide dogma. Without it, there is no certainly that the Gospel, the Cross is for ME (indeed, if Limited Atonement is true, it's very likely NOT for me). And if Limited Atonement is true (and the BIble wrong), then why didn't Jesus repeatedly say "I'm probably NOT your Savior, I did NOT come for most people, God ONLY loves some unknown few?" His whole ministry would be dishonest, at best.

Friend, for 2000 years, Christianity has affirmed that personal justification hinges on TWO things - both essential - the Cross (the atoning work of Jesus) AND faith that apprehends/applies that. It affirms that the Cross is universal but faith is not.




.
 
Last edited:

brightfame52

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 28, 2022
Messages
1,149
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Faith may be necessary insofar as it is both required and produced in the elect.
Faith in Salvation is the fruit and effect of Spirit regeneration. Its a fruit of the Spirit Gal 5:22
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Faith in Salvation is the fruit and effect of Spirit regeneration. Its a fruit of the Spirit Gal 5:22

So, you hold that one is justified apart from faith: FIRST one has personal justification (apart from faith, no faith being present) THEN (sometime after that) faith comes?


.
 

Faith

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
1,140
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
That was a wise decision. Not everyone is equipped...even the disciples were trained for 3 years.
Yes, thats true. I just don’t fully trust a pastor who hasn’t been trained. They’re just teaching their opinion, not what the church as a whole teaches. Though this was a non denominational church I think ran by that pastor and his son. They have two campuses both run by these guys. They are popular around here, though.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Yes, thats true. I just don’t fully trust a pastor who hasn’t been trained. They’re just teaching their opinion, not what the church as a whole teaches. Though this was a non denominational church I think ran by that pastor and his son. They have two campuses both run by these guys. They are popular around here, though.
...and to make that kind of situation even more troublesome, those churches usually have almost no published, formal Statement of Beliefs.

Sometimes there are five or six very basis affirmations (belief in the Bible, Christ was the Savior, etc.), but nothing really about any of the vexing issues that have divided the major Christian denominations. As a result, the congregants have next to no guidance on doctrine and proper worship other than what the pastor (and his co-pastoring relatives) say is the truth.
 

Faith

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
1,140
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
...and to make that kind of situation even more troublesome, those churches usually have almost no published, formal Statement of Beliefs.

Sometimes there are five or six very basis affirmations (belief in the Bible, Christ was the Savior, etc.), but nothing really about any of the vexing issues that have divided the major Christian denominations. As a result, the congregants have next to no guidance on doctrine and proper worship other than what the pastor (and his co-pastoring relatives) say is the truth.
Yep. Your last sentence is what really bothered me about that church. And when I inquired about how much or where they were trained, by e-mail, they kept dodging my questions. I eventually got an answer out of them, but it took persistence on my part.
 
Last edited:

prism

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
711
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Faith in Salvation is the fruit and effect of Spirit regeneration. Its a fruit of the Spirit Gal 5:22
Who has faith in salvation? Better, faith in Jesus and Him crucified.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Who has faith in salvation? Better, faith in Jesus and Him crucified.
Right. And it's very important in any discussion like this one to differentiate between Faith in the Biblical sense and ordinary faith, meaning having confidence in something or other.

The latter can be used to say that you are trusting that almost anything will happen, whether it be faith that the sun will rise again tomorrow or faith in the ability of your neighbor to fix that broken window he said needs replacing, or anything else of that sort.

Faith in Christ transcends every kind of trust we might have in the likelihood that known facts of life will perform as expected.
 
Top Bottom