Jesus Christ, died for all

Andrew

Matt 18:15
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
6,645
Age
40
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Let's use a different perspective if I may.
Lets say that an unbeliever boasts out loud saying "Your god cannot make me believe because if he could he would, I believe he is too weak therefore is not truly god"... now lets assume that this unbeliever took this to the grave... does this mean that God was weak or that he has predestined these unbelieving unrepented sinners to where they rightfully belong?
 

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
32,653
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Lammechen, you are using a universalist argument and then adding a huge BUT to try counteract your own argument.

You are saying that Jesus died for all. You are saying that the atonement removed the sins of ALL humanity. I ask you once again...if that is true, how can God condemn those whom Jesus has made perfect? "There is now, therefore, no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus."

But...you add an interesting twist. You claim that Jesus has made everyone holy and perfect, but humans can deny that reality and thus by denying the truth, God condemns them...even though they are, in truth, completely holy and righteous.

In the end, salvation hinges upon the feelings and emotions of the human being at the moment they are brought into God's presence. If they have any doubt in God's atonement and justification....that person will be condemned and thrown into hell!

Let's look at the entire chapter. I will highlight some important things.

Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.

6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. 16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. 17 For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous. 20 Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

I highlight much here to show you the limited work of Christ in atonement that Paul is clearly teaching. Notice all the times he says we. If, Paul were advocating for universal (unlimited) atonement, Paul would have said "all." But, Paul doesn't. Paul limits his words to those for whom Jesus died.
So, when you see that, you realize that Paul cannot be saying that the universal world (all) are justified and atoned for (as you claim in verse 18). Instead, we must understand that Paul is telling the Romans that the atonement and God's subsequent justification is not limited to the Jews, nor to the Greeks, nor to the Romans, but it is provided to every nation, tribe and tongue. The inclusive nature of the Gospel and its reach is universal, but the reception of the gospel and the effectiveness of the atonement (and subsequent justification) is limited to those whom the Father has given Jesus to be His sheep.
Reading the entire chapter, one cannot escape the truth of limited atonement...that Christ died only for the elect. To twist it any other way is to ignore the whole of the text.

You have implied things that I do not believe, nor have I stated here. In fact, it seems you haven't been reading what I have said concerning the topic. I do not believe all will be in heaven...and that is because mankind CAN reject God.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
You have implied things that I do not believe, nor have I stated here. In fact, it seems you haven't been reading what I have said concerning the topic. I do not believe all will be in heaven...and that is because mankind CAN reject God.
You have stated that all are atoned by Jesus sacrifice. That means that all their sins are made white as snow. Jesus has justified them.
You then say that only those with faith are actually justified, therefore the atoning sacrifice of Christ is not effective until faith activates the atonement. The atonement is only potentially real, not effectively real because you "limit" the effect of the atonement only to those who have faith.
I am surprised you do not see the problem in your thinking.
I have laid out the entire chapter in Romans 5 for you to see the process. Limited atonement is very much taught by Paul in this chapter.
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,573
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Have you heard of the false equivalency fallacy? You've perpetuated this in numerous threads and thrown "UNIVERSALIST!" at so many posters it's incredible. Folks saying that the sacrifice of Christ is effectual for all does not equate with universal atonement because not all are/will be saved. This isn't rocket science, but basic Christianity 101.

ef·fec·tu·al
/əˈfek(t)SH(o͞o)əl/
adjective
(of something inanimate or abstract) successful in producing a desired or intended result; effective.

How can the "sacrifice of Christ" be EFFECTUAL for all if "not all are/will be saved"? Isn't that exactly the opposite of "effectual"?
The "sacrifice of Christ" is SUFFICIENT (enough; adequate) for all, but it is EFFECTIVE (successful in producing a desired or intended result) only for some people ... those who ultimately reach Heaven.

The question is ... Do PEOPLE render Jesus' suffient sacrifice ineffective (overriding God's will that every single person be saved), or did GOD limit Jesus sacrifice to only his children (leaving the sins of unbelievers on themselves)?
Or some other alternative view?

However the definition of EFFECTUAL demands UNIVERSALISM or an explanation how a sin is "RE-APPLIED" (the forgiveness is reversed).
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
So prove this.
1) You say Jesus sacrifice is effectual for all.
If it effectively makes all humanity perfect and removes all humanities sins, what would God judge them for? What sin could possibly be greater than Jesus atoning sacrifice?
How can people not be saved if God sees them as entirely made righteous by Jesus atoning sacrifice?

Let's look at "effectual":

Merriam-Webster Online said:
Producing or able to produce a desired effect (emphasis mine)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/effectual

There are two emphases given to the term - Producing (the meaning you assign when you see it used) or able to produce (the meaning I intend when I use it). So - what is the shed blood of Christ able to produce? The salvation of all who believe. It is NOT, however, effectual in producing the salvation of all - because not all will believe. Until you see this difference I'm sure you will persist in your misrepresentation of what people are trying to say and present a false narrative of our taking a "Universalist" position
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Let's look at "effectual":


There are two emphases given to the term - Producing (the meaning you assign when you see it used) or able to produce (the meaning I intend when I use it). So - what is the shed blood of Christ able to produce? The salvation of all who believe. It is NOT, however, effectual in producing the salvation of all - because not all will believe. Until you see this difference I'm sure you will persist in your misrepresentation of what people are trying to say and present a false narrative of our taking a "Universalist" position

What did the atoning sacrifice of a lamb accomplish for the people of Israel? It made them right with God. Holy. Set-apart.
Jesus atonement removes the sin of the person for whom he bled and died. They are made holy, set apart, perfect by the sacrifice of the Lamb of God.
Tell me how God can condemn that which Jesus has made perfect by atoning sacrifice.
Tell me how Jesus sacrifice is not effectively justifying the sinner. Is his sacrifice worthless until God gives the gift of faith?
I am sure you will persist in making Jesus atonement of no value to those for whom he died.
What you do is say one thing and then give a HUGE BUT that utterly desicrates the sacrifice of Christ and makes it worthless for those whom you claim he has made righteous.
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
*Edited...
Tell me how Jesus sacrifice is not effectively justifying the sinner.

That's been YOUR bit all along about how his sacrifice effectively justifies some sinners Don't put it on me now.

Is his sacrifice worthless until God gives the gift of faith?

It is effectual, as I said. Was there a misunderstanding?

I am sure you will persist in making Jesus atonement of no value to those for whom he died.

Just... what??

What you do is say one thing and then give a HUGE BUT that utterly desicrates the sacrifice of Christ and makes it worthless for those whom you claim he has made righteous.

The word is "desecrates". You're welcome. The rest? Just... what?
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
What did the atoning sacrifice of a lamb accomplish for the people of Israel? It made them right with God. Holy. Set-apart.

It did no such thing. The Law of Moses was still the bench-mark

Jesus atonement removes the sin of the person for whom he bled and died. They are made holy, set apart, perfect by the sacrifice of the Lamb of God.

You say this, then ask me how it is not effectively justifying "the sinner" So, is it for "the sinner" or for "the person for whom he bled and died"?



















And WE engage in double-speak... smh...
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
That's been YOUR bit all along about how his sacrifice effectively justifies some sinners Don't put it on me now.
It is entirely on YOU to show how Jesus atoning sacrifice fails to make humans holy for who Jesus died.
For me, I claim that the people whom God has given Jesus were made entirely holy by Jesus sacrifice. Jesus simply didn't atone for those whom God the Father did not give him. These people die without any atonement for their sins. They are the goats who are under the curse (Matthew 25).

It is effectual, as I said. Was there a misunderstanding?
If it is effectual, then all people are made holy because all sins are atoned for.
Yet, you utterly reject what I point out.
You have a terrible understanding of "effectual" if in fact you deny that Jesus atoning sacrifice fails to make those for whom he died completely holy and perfect.

Just... what??
Back at you. You have attempted to eviscerate the atonement and make it worthless for a vast majority of humanity. (Unless you are secretly a universalist. But you deny that so your argument is utterly nonsense to me.)

The word is "desecrates". You're welcome. The rest? Just... what?
Thanks. Again...back at you. What??? You make no sense and instead purposely obfuscate the atonement of Christ.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
It did no such thing. The Law of Moses was still the bench-mark



You say this, then ask me how it is not effectively justifying "the sinner" So, is it for "the sinner" or for "the person for whom he bled and died"?



















And WE engage in double-speak... smh...
You are engaged in double speak.
What you say is simple.
You say Jesus made all humanity holy and righteous by his atoning sacrifice.
Then you turn around and say that God still condemns people as sinners, despite Jesus having paid for their sins.
I ask you...which one is it? You cannot have both. The Bible doesn't teach both. God does not condemn those who are made entirely righteous.
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
If it is effectual, then all people are made holy because all sins are atoned for.

No. And I clearly said that.

Yet, you utterly reject what I point out.

Mostly.

You have a terrible understanding of "effectual" if in fact you deny that Jesus atoning sacrifice fails to make those for whom he died completely holy and perfect.

As I suspected:

ID2 in Post #45 said:
I'm sure you will persist in your misrepresentation of what people are trying to say and present a false narrative of (my) taking a "Universalist" position

Now we can add "if in fact you deny that Jesus atoning sacrifice fails to make those for whom he died completely holy and perfect"

Soooooo.... You keep just keep right on misrepresenting and we'll keep refuting your... well, I can't say what ;)
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,573
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Let's use a different perspective if I may.
Lets say that an unbeliever boasts out loud saying "Your god cannot make me believe because if he could he would, I believe he is too weak therefore is not truly god"... now lets assume that this unbeliever took this to the grave... does this mean that God was weak or that he has predestined these unbelieving unrepented sinners to where they rightfully belong?

Let’s say tat your 5 year old says “If you love me, then you will buy me a hippopotamus for Christmas.” If you then do not buy them a hippopotamus for Christmas, does that prove that your child was bad and did not deserve a hippopotamus or that you do not love your child?

Neither. It proves that you were never under any obligation to buy a hippopotamus. Whether the child was good or bad does not matter. Whether you love them or do not love them does not matter. The parent is not controlled by the whims of the child.

... and neither is GOD.

[Rom 9:14-18 NASB] 14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! 15 For He says to Moses, "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION." 16 So then it [does] not [depend] on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH." 18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

“God does as He pleases, and He does it right well.” - Corrie ten Boom
 
Last edited:

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
You are engaged in double speak.

No

What you say is simple.

Yes

You say Jesus made all humanity holy and righteous by his atoning sacrifice.

No. As many times as you say it, no.

Then you turn around and say that God still condemns people as sinners, despite Jesus having paid for their sins.

No. As many times as you say it, no.

*Edit* God does not condemn those who are made entirely righteous.

Right
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
No. And I clearly said that.
What did you clearly state? Because you haven't yet said anything clearly.
Question: Are the sins of the entire world completely paid for so that all humans are made perfect before God?
You seem to be saying...no.
Therefore, Jesus cannot have atoned for the entire world. If He did, the entire world would be perfect in the eyes of God. That is what the atoning sacrifice of Christ DOES!
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
What did you clearly state?

-___-

Let's look at "effectual":

Originally Posted by Merriam-Webster Online
Producing or able to produce a desired effect (emphasis mine)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/effectual

There are two emphases given to the term - Producing (the meaning you assign when you see it used) or able to produce (the meaning I intend when I use it). So - what is the shed blood of Christ able to produce? The salvation of all who believe. It is NOT, however, effectual in producing the salvation of all - because not all will believe. Until you see this difference I'm sure you will persist in your misrepresentation of what people are trying to say and present a false narrative of our taking a "Universalist" position

Questions?
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
-___-



Questions?
Yes, your statement about effectual. Say it so that it fits with scripture.
Are you saying there is a difference between effective and effectual?
Effective means it accomplishes that which it intended to do. Effectual means the same thing.
Jesus atoning sacrifice effectively, effectually, actually made the person who Jesus died for, completely and entirely holy and perfect before God. The atonement is effective.
But, you are now denying that and saying "no" it doesn't.
Why do you deny the atonement as being effective (effectual) to make all persons for whom Christ died perfect and holy before God?
Why do you deny it?
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,573
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Questions?
One small one, just for clarification ...

You said “So - what is the shed blood of Christ able to produce? The salvation of all who believe.”

Is it a fair statement to claim that Jesus died on the cross to atone for “all who believe”, making his sacrifice “effective” (actually producing the desired result) of saving all who would be saved (all who believe)?

[I suspect you can see that we are heading towards the “L” of TULIP].

If this is not your belief, then could you clarify exactly what you believe the shed blood of Jesus actually DID accomplish (as distinct from what it COULD have accomplished)?
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Yes, your statement about effectual. Say it so that it fits with scripture.
Are you saying there is a difference between effective and effectual?
Effective means it accomplishes that which it intended to do. Effectual means the same thing.
Jesus atoning sacrifice effectively, effectually, actually made the person who Jesus died for, completely and entirely holy and perfect before God. The atonement is effective.
But, you are now denying that and saying "no" it doesn't.
Why do you deny the atonement as being effective (effectual) to make all persons for whom Christ died perfect and holy before God?
Why do you deny it?

I don't deny it, and somehow our wires have gotten crossed, but I'm done here for the moment



















*Which is not a "win" for you - just tired of beating a dead horse
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
I don't deny it, and somehow our wires have gotten crossed, but I', done for the moment



















*Which is not a "win" for you - just tired of beating a dead horse
So now you are saying the atonement is effective (effectual) to make all persons for whom Christ died perfect and holy before God?
But, not all people are perfect and holy before God, therefore Christ's atonement is only for some, not all? The atonement is limited? Correct?
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,207
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
So now you are saying the atonement is effective (effectual) to make all persons for whom Christ died perfect and holy before God?
I am very sure that ImaginaryDay2 did not say what you've misrepresented him as saying.

But, not all people are perfect and holy before God, therefore Christ's atonement is only for some, not all? The atonement is limited? Correct?
 
Top Bottom