Jesus Christ, died for all

[MoreCoffee]

The Lord, Jesus Christ, died for all, yet not all receive the benefit of His death, his death benefits only those to whom the merit of Christ's passion is communicated.

 

[MennoSota]

The Lord, Jesus Christ, died for all, yet not all receive the benefit of His death, his death benefits only those to whom the merit of Christ's passion is communicated.

John 17:9-10
[9]“My prayer is not for the world, but for those you have given me, because they belong to you.
[10]All who are mine belong to you, and you have given them to me, so they bring me glory.

 

[MoreCoffee]

John 17:9-10
[9]“My prayer is not for the world, but for those you have given me, because they belong to you.
[10]All who are mine belong to you, and you have given them to me, so they bring me glory.

Is the fragment from John 17 relevant in some way?

 

[MennoSota]

Is the fragment from John 17 relevant in some way?

Read all of John 17. Jesus only addresses those whom the Father has given him, never the whole world.
Your claim is that Jesus spilled His blood in vain.

 

[Josiah]

The Lord, Jesus Christ, died for all, yet not all receive the benefit of His death, his death benefits only those to whom the merit of Christ's passion is communicated.

Here is the PROTESTANT view which your denomination repudiates and condemns:

In narrow justification (the issue of the attaining of faith, spiritual life and the Holy Spirit - thus a changed relationship with God, being a Christian and child of God), PROTESTANTS proclaim (as one united position) Sola Gratia - Solus Christus - Sola Fide. All this happens purely as a result of God's mercy, without any merit in self and without dead self achieving it.... and because of Jesus Christ who alone is THE SAVIOR via His incarnation/life, death and resurrection... which is apprehended via the divine gift of faith (trust, reliance). John 3:16. The PROTESTANT position rejects that each dead self saves self by his own good works thus making God, Christ, the Cross irrelevant.... Protestants reject that Jesus saves no one and is not the Savior at all but rather, instead of that, in lieu of that, is merely a HELPER or POSSIBILITY MAKER but that each dead self saves self by the works of self.

Most PROTESTANTS (some Calvinists disagreeing) hold that Sola Gratia applies to all.... and that Solus Christus applies to all... but Sola Fide does not, not every 7.4 billion people currently on Earth have faith. Thus, PROTESTANTS reject universalism (that all are justified irrespective of faith). This is the third aspect of Justification which the RCC repudiates and condemns.



- Josiah




.

 

[MoreCoffee]

God bless you too, Josiah.

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. 1 John 2:1-6

 

[Josiah]

God bless you too, Josiah.

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. 1 John 2:1-6

God bless you, too, MC.

Thank you for that Protestant affirmation.

 

[MoreCoffee]

God bless you, too, MC.

Thank you for that Protestant affirmation.

Praise God that Protestants (at least some of them) affirm the gospel truths taught by saint John the theologian.

 

[atpollard]

Is the fragment from John 17 relevant in some way?

Not to a Roman Catholic. :ewink:

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Not to a Roman Catholic. :ewink:

How so?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Not to a Roman Catholic. :ewink:

I do not know what you mean.

 

[atpollard]

How so?

Post #1 tells how Roman Catholics believe in “Unlimited Atonement” (Jesus died for “all” = every single person).
Post #2 responds with the verse from John to support “Limited Atonement” (Jesus died for “all” = all of the people that the Father has given to Jesus and whose sins are forgiven)
Post #3 asks if the quote from John 17 is relevant.

Given the position in post #1 and rebuttal in post #3, I felt that the evidence given in this topic suggested that it was not relevant to Roman Catholics (or anyone else who believes in “Universal Atonement”). These discussions never change minds.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Post #1 tells how Roman Catholics believe in “Unlimited Atonement” (Jesus died for “all” = every single person).
Post #2 responds with the verse from John to support “Limited Atonement” (Jesus died for “all” = all of the people that the Father has given to Jesus and whose sins are forgiven)
Post #3 asks if the quote from John 17 is relevant.

Given the position in post #1 and rebuttal in post #3

Rebuttal? It was a question. Not a statement.

, I felt that the evidence given in this topic suggested that it was not relevant to Roman Catholics (or anyone else who believes in “Universal Atonement”). These discussions never change minds.

Very few minds are open to change especially on religious matters.

 

[pinacled]

The Lord, Jesus Christ, died for all, yet not all receive the benefit of His death, his death benefits only those to whom the merit of Christ's passion is communicated.

"For the Son of Man is Lord of the Shabbat"

More appropriately I believe reverence and respect is needed so that a person may understand the blessings of the seventh day
One only need to read from the hebrew to find the promise of the honorable bond of peace.

Shemot(exodus) 20; {the names} He was with God in the beginning

but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord, your God; you shall perform no labor, neither you, your son, your daughter, your manservant, your maidservant, your beast, nor your stranger who is in your cities. יוְי֨וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֜י שַׁבָּ֣ת | לַֽיהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֗יךָ לֹ֣א תַֽעֲשֶׂ֣ה כָל־מְלָאכָ֡ה אַתָּ֣ה | וּבִנְךָ֣־וּ֠בִתֶּךָ עַבְדְּךָ֨ וַֽאֲמָֽתְךָ֜ וּבְהֶמְתֶּ֗ךָ וְגֵֽרְךָ֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בִּשְׁעָרֶ֔יךָ:
שַׁבָּ֣ת

For [in] six days the Lord made the heaven and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and He rested on the seventh day. Therefore, the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and sanctified it. יאכִּ֣י שֵֽׁשֶׁת־יָמִים֩ עָשָׂ֨ה יְהֹוָ֜ה אֶת־הַשָּׁמַ֣יִם וְאֶת־הָאָ֗רֶץ אֶת־הַיָּם֙ וְאֶת־כָּל־אֲשֶׁר־בָּ֔ם וַיָּ֖נַח בַּיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֑י עַל־כֵּ֗ן בֵּרַ֧ךְ יְהֹוָ֛ה אֶת־י֥וֹם הַשַּׁבָּ֖ת וַֽיְקַדְּשֵֽׁהוּ:
הַשַּׁבָּ֖ת

https://www.hebrew4christians.com/Grammar/Unit_One/Aleph-Bet/aleph-bet.html



[Judges 12:6 ["And they said to him, "Say now 'Shibboleth,' " and he said "Sibboleth," and he was not prepared to pronounce it properly, and they grabbed him and slaughtered him at the fords of the Jordan; and there fell at that time of Ephriam, forty-two thousand."]


Or as i was taught with discretion in the spirit; " 3s and 4s are the way of the King. "
The red letter is a [ה]hei.
As in the 4th yr being a holy praise after leaving the land untouched for three yrs. The fifth yr is something beyond time that can only be found given with perseverance and patience..

 

[MoreCoffee]

I've never thought of the seventh day as dying for the sins of God's people nor have I ever though of Sabbath keeping as one of the weightier matters of the Law as are justice and mercy.

 

[TurtleHare]

Read all of John 17. Jesus only addresses those whom the Father has given him, never the whole world.
Your claim is that Jesus spilled His blood in vain.

Was Christ offering his blood to Judas in vain as well then on the night He was betrayed and broke bread with the disciples and the same night He instituted the Lord's Supper?

God is just and merciful and it is true that Jesus died for all and not only for some and it is also true that not all will go to heaven and that reason is the application of faith so that subjectively he becomes justified, having taken hold of the blessings from the cross given to him. God has a system and it includes election, Jesus, the cross, forgiveness, the disciples spreading the good news, man hearing the Word of the Gospel and faith being given, man will have eternal life when he dies or christ returns whichever comes first.

 

[MennoSota]

Was Christ offering his blood to Judas in vain as well then on the night He was betrayed and broke bread with the disciples and the same night He instituted the Lord's Supper?

God is just and merciful and it is true that Jesus died for all and not only for some and it is also true that not all will go to heaven and that reason is the application of faith so that subjectively he becomes justified, having taken hold of the blessings from the cross given to him. God has a system and it includes election, Jesus, the cross, forgiveness, the disciples spreading the good news, man hearing the Word of the Gospel and faith being given, man will have eternal life when he dies or christ returns whichever comes first.

Had Jesus atoned for sins at that supper?
You also expose the foolishness of claiming the actual body and blood of Jesus in communion.
TH, you are attempting to create a correlation that is not there.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

You also expose the foolishness of claiming the actual body and blood of Jesus in communion.

"Here's some grape juice which is poured out..." (Mat. 26:28a - Menno Version)

What it actually says:

https://biblehub.com/matthew/26-28.htm

 

[MennoSota]

"Here's some grape juice which is poured out..." (Mat. 26:28a - Menno Version)

What it actually says:

https://biblehub.com/matthew/26-28.htm

Matthew 26:26-28 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

I see two things. First, Jesus is changing the Passover meal to declare the New Covenant, which is established by his atoning sacrifice.
Second, I
see that his atoning sacrifice is "for many" for the forgiveness of sins. Notice, Jesus didn't say "for all." Limited atonement right there. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
Finally, Jesus did not slice up his actual body, nor did he cut open a vein to draw blood. Like the Passover meal, Jesus is establishing a memorial for us to remember his sacrifice. He wasn't saying that he was perpetually being sacrificed and his chosen needed to constantly recharge their salvation by eating his flesh and drinking his blood. The disciples knew this as Jews, yet you take it literally despite the obvious symbolism being presented.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Matthew 26:26-28 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

I see two things. First, Jesus is changing the Passover meal to declare the New Covenant, which is established by his atoning sacrifice.
Second, I
see that his atoning sacrifice is "for many" for the forgiveness of sins. Notice, Jesus didn't say "for all." Limited atonement right there. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
Finally, Jesus did not slice up his actual body, nor did he cut open a vein to draw blood. Like the Passover meal, Jesus is establishing a memorial for us to remember his sacrifice. He wasn't saying that he was perpetually being sacrificed and his chosen needed to constantly recharge their salvation by eating his flesh and drinking his blood. The disciples knew this as Jews, yet you take it literally despite the obvious symbolism being presented.

Does it not seem possible to you that "for many" is inclusive rather than exclusive. The Lord did not say "for a few" which is what "limited" tends to imply. He said "for many" implying many will be forgiven because his blood of the new covenant is poured out for them. But if the phrase makes you feel confident about limited atonement, even though it is not making an argument for "limited atonement", then how do you cope with passages that deliberately and directly state that Christ died for the sins of the whole world? Surely the phrase "for the sins of the whole world" is less obscure in its extent than "for many".
1 John 2:2 and he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.