Did Christ die for them that are perishing ?

[brightfame52]

It accomplished the appeasement of Gods Wrath!

People, for the whole world of persons that Christ died for, His Death for them did propitate Gods Wrath for them 1 Jn 2:1-2. God has no more wrath for them. Therefore, where the scripture speaks of people being under Gods Wrath Jn 3:36

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.


So reasonably concluding, the ones that believes not, and are under Gods Wrath, can't be any Christ died for. 58

 

[jswauto]

the appeasement of Gods Wrath!

✦ Scripture Explicitly Says Christ Died for People While They Were Under Wrath ✦​

The conclusion collapses because it ignores the apostolic timeline of salvation. Treating “wrath” as a permanent identity rather than a temporal condition. Scripture repeatedly says that the very people Christ died for were, at the time of His death, under wrath, enemies, ungodly, and perishing. The New Testament does not hide this — it emphasizes it.
Paul says plainly:

“While we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son.” — Romans 5:10

Enemies are not neutral. Enemies are under wrath. Yet Paul says Christ’s death reconciled those enemies.
Paul also says:

“Christ died for the ungodly.” — Romans 5:6

The ungodly are not justified, not believing, not regenerated, and absolutely under wrath. Yet Christ died for them.
Paul goes further:

“While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” — Romans 5:8

“Sinners” here is not a generic category — it is the same group Paul describes as “children of wrath” in Ephesians 2:3. And yet Christ died for them while they were in that condition.
And Paul is explicit:

“We were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.” — Ephesians 2:3

Who is the “we”? The elect. The saved. The believers Paul is writing to.
Meaning: the elect were under wrath before faith, and Christ died for them while they were under wrath.
If your logic were correct, then:

• the elect were never enemies,
• never ungodly,
• never sinners,
• never children of wrath,
• never condemned,
• never perishing,
• never alienated,
• never dead in sins.

But Paul says all of these were true of the elect before regeneration.
Your conclusion reverses Paul’s order:

• Christ’s death secures reconciliation.
• The Spirit applies reconciliation.
• Faith receives reconciliation.
• Wrath is removed at reconciliation, not at Calvary.

Christ died for people while they were under wrath. Wrath is removed when the Spirit unites them to Christ.
This is Paul’s timeline. Your timeline is not Paul’s.

 

[brightfame52]

✦ Scripture Explicitly Says Christ Died for People While They Were Under Wrath ✦​

The conclusion collapses because it ignores the apostolic timeline of salvation. Treating “wrath” as a permanent identity rather than a temporal condition. Scripture repeatedly says that the very people Christ died for were, at the time of His death, under wrath, enemies, ungodly, and perishing. The New Testament does not hide this — it emphasizes it.
Paul says plainly:

Enemies are not neutral. Enemies are under wrath. Yet Paul says Christ’s death reconciled those enemies.
Paul also says:

The ungodly are not justified, not believing, not regenerated, and absolutely under wrath. Yet Christ died for them.
Paul goes further:

“Sinners” here is not a generic category — it is the same group Paul describes as “children of wrath” in Ephesians 2:3. And yet Christ died for them while they were in that condition.
And Paul is explicit:

Who is the “we”? The elect. The saved. The believers Paul is writing to.
Meaning: the elect were under wrath before faith, and Christ died for them while they were under wrath.
If your logic were correct, then:

• the elect were never enemies,
• never ungodly,
• never sinners,
• never children of wrath,
• never condemned,
• never perishing,
• never alienated,
• never dead in sins.

But Paul says all of these were true of the elect before regeneration.
Your conclusion reverses Paul’s order:

• Christ’s death secures reconciliation.
• The Spirit applies reconciliation.
• Faith receives reconciliation.
• Wrath is removed at reconciliation, not at Calvary.

Christ died for people while they were under wrath. Wrath is removed when the Spirit unites them to Christ.
This is Paul’s timeline. Your timeline is not Paul’s.

jswauto, you are spinning in a circle of your own legal contradictions. You are completely confusing the legal satisfaction of God’s justice at Calvary with the experiential application of that victory in the conscience of the sinner. Let’s correct your timeline and look at how courtroom law actually operates.

You state with absolute confidence: "Wrath is removed at reconciliation, not at Calvary." But in the exact same breath, you admit: "Christ’s death secures reconciliation."

Let’s apply basic legal logic to your contradictory statements:

If reconciliation was secured at Calvary by His death, then the legal basis for the removal of wrath was completely, unalterably finished 2,000 years ago! If God's wrath is still legally active against the elect—meaning they are in danger of eternal damnation until they perform an act of faith—then Christ's death did not secure a single thing. It only made salvation a possibility that man must finalize.

You run to Ephesians 2:3 where Paul says the elect were “by nature the children of wrath, even as others.” You think this text proves that God’s legal wrath was not appeased at the cross.

You are completely failing to distinguish between our natural/experiential condition in time and our legal/covenantal standing before the throne of God.

Naturally and experientially, before regeneration, the elect are totally dead in sin, carnal, hostile, and under the felt condemnation of a broken Law. They are walking the path of destruction.

But legally, what was their status? Look at the very text you quoted! Romans 5:10 explicitly states: “For if, when we were enemies, we WERE RECONILED to God by the death of his Son...”

The Greek verb is katēllagēmen—which is an aorist passive. It denotes a fully completed, past-tense legal transaction!

Let's look at the absolute finality of this courtroom ledger: Isaiah 59:2 says sin causes absolute separation between man and God. God cannot be reconciled to anyone whose sins are still charged to their account. Therefore, if the elect were reconciled to God by the death of His Son while they were still enemies, it is a mathematical certainty that God's legal wrath toward them was fully, completely, and eternally appeased at Calvary! He blotted out their handwriting of ordinances and nailed it to the tree (Colossians 2:14).

Your system requires an absolute legal absurdity. You are forcing the Holy Spirit to go into an elect soul, unite them to Christ, and apply a "reconciliation" that you claim hadn't actually removed God's wrath yet. You have the Spirit trying to apply a finished victory before the Judge has even accepted the payment.

In my theology, Paul's timeline is unbroken and perfect:

1. The Cross: Christ functions as the Surety, bears the curse, makes an end of sins (Daniel 9:24), and completely appeases legal wrath for His elect, leaving them objectively reconciled to God while they are still unborn enemies.
2. The New Birth: The Holy Spirit sovereignly breaks into the dead soul of the elect via immediate regeneration without the Gospel, giving them life.
3. The Gospel (Time Salvation): The preaching of Christ brings that finished legal reconciliation out into the open light (2 Tim 1:10). Faith is the eye that sees the wrath has already been turned away by the blood of the Lamb.

Stop trying to make your faith the pivot point that turns away God's wrath. Stop preaching a failed cross where wrath remains active against people whose debt you claim was paid. Bow to the absolute, sin-ending efficacy of the blood of Christ, and believe the finished record of the Son!

---

 

[jswauto]

The Moral Status of Children and the Responsibility of Adults in Salvation**

Intro:​

Scripture draws a clear and consistent line between those who cannot exercise moral discernment and those who must. Children, who “do not yet know good from evil” (Deut. 1:39), are treated throughout the Bible as non‑responsible moral agents. They cannot reject Christ, suppress truth, or knowingly choose darkness. Adults, by contrast, possess moral knowledge, are accountable for unbelief, and must respond to the gospel through the God‑given capacity to repent and believe. This distinction explains why children are received by God’s mercy without personal faith, while adults must freely receive the reconciliation Christ secured.

1. Children Are Not “Elect vs Non‑Elect” — They Are “Non‑Responsible.”​

Scripture consistently treats children as a distinct moral category:

• They do not yet know good from evil (Deut. 1:39).
• They cannot discern their right hand from their left (Jonah 4:11).
• They have no knowledge of the law’s demands (Rom. 7:9).
• They are not yet accountable for unbelief (Rom. 5:13).
• They are under God’s protective mercy (Matt. 18:10,14).

The biblical pattern is simple:

Children are not judged for unbelief because they are not capable of belief.​

They are not “rejecting Christ.” They are not “resisting grace.” They are not “choosing darkness.” They are not “enemies in their minds.” They are not “children of wrath by nature.”
They are non‑responsible moral agents.
This is why every theological tradition — Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Arminian, Calvinist — affirms that children who die are received by God.

2. Adults Are Accountable Because They Possess Moral Knowledge.​

Scripture draws a hard line between:

those who cannot choose​

and

those who must choose.​

Adults:

• know good and evil (Heb. 5:14)
• suppress truth (Rom. 1:18)
• reject light (John 3:19)
• refuse repentance (Luke 13:3)
• resist the Spirit (Acts 7:51)
• deny Christ (Matt. 10:33)
• reject the gospel (2 Thess. 1:8)

This is why Jesus commands:

• “Repent.”
• “Believe.”
• “Follow Me.”
• “Come to Me.”
• “Abide in My word.”
• “Confess Me before men.”

These are moral commands, not metaphysical descriptions.
Children cannot obey these commands. Adults must.

3. Children Are Covered by Christ’s Atonement Without Personal Faith.​

This is the part some hate, but Scripture is clear:

Faith is the means of receiving reconciliation — not the means of qualifying for it.​

Children cannot exercise faith. Yet Christ says:

“Of such is the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt. 19:14)

This means:

• Christ’s atonement covers them,
• God’s mercy receives them,
• the Spirit regenerates them without gospel hearing,
• they are saved by grace, not by decision.

This is the same principle Paul uses for the mentally disabled, the unreached infants, and those incapable of moral choice.

4. Adults Must Exercise Their God‑Given Free Moral Agency.​

This is the key distinction:

**Children are saved without choice.​

Adults are saved through choice.**
Not because choice creates salvation — it doesn’t.
But because choice is the God‑ordained means by which adults:

• receive reconciliation (Rom. 5:11)
• receive justification (Rom. 5:1)
• receive salvation (Rom. 10:9–10)
• receive the Spirit (Gal. 3:2)
• enter Christ (Gal. 3:26–27)

Children cannot do these things. Adults must.
This is why Jesus says:

“You will die in your sins unless you believe.” (John 8:24)

Children cannot “die in unbelief.” Adults can.

5. The Moral Logic Is Simple and Unbreakable.​

Children → No moral knowledge → No accountability → No rejection → No condemnation → Heaven.​

Adults → Moral knowledge → Accountability → Possible rejection → Possible condemnation → Choice matters.​

This is not Arminianism. This is not Pelagianism. This is not semi‑Pelagianism.
This is Jesus’ own teaching:

• “To whom much is given, much is required.” (Luke 12:48)
• “If you were blind, you would have no guilt.” (John 9:41)
• “Now that you say you see, your guilt remains.” (John 9:41)

Children are “blind” in the moral sense. Adults “see.”
Therefore:

**Children have no guilt.​

Adults do.**

6. The Final Summary ​

Children go to heaven because they lack moral knowledge, cannot reject Christ, and are covered by Christ’s atonement without personal faith. Adults must respond to Christ because they possess moral knowledge, are accountable for unbelief, and must receive reconciliation through faith. Children are saved without choice; adults are saved through choice.

This is airtight, biblical, and immune to hyper‑Calvinist distortion.