Jesus died for the sins of the world

[Doran]

I have some things to write about John 10, which by the way the vast majority of theologians call the Good Shepherd Discourse. No one I know of calls it the Faith Discourse.

Did everyone catch what Jesus said in v.17? I'm thinking not, so permit to elaborate a little.

John 10:17
17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life — only to take it up again.
NIV

This is, yet, another qualified statement as to why God loves someone. In this case, the Someone is none other than His only Begotten Son. Jesus' statement here certainly accords well with OT passages that essentially teach the same thing (cp Ex 20:6; Deut 7:9). So, since this is true of God's Son, how much moe for we mere mortals!? What Jesus is essentially saying is that because he's obedient even unto death of the cross, his Father loves him.

The thing to understand about qualified statements is that they place limitations of one kind or another on the action of the subject. In this verse, God places limits on his love [on the condition] of obedience. In fact, qualified statements have the same limiting effect as conditional statements do that begin with IF! (An example will soon follow.)

But Jesus made more qualified statements about God's love to wit:

John 14:21
21 Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him."
NIV

In these passages, we unmistakably see the moral quality to God's love. He loves people because they love. Nearly everyone in the world understands that love is a virtue. In fact, two of the definitions of "virtue" is a "conformity to a standard of right: MORALITY. A particular moral excellence." It's no wonder that the two greatest commandments upon which the Law and the Prophets turn is love for God and love for neighbor -- in this order. This is why I can confidently say that God CANNOT love evil. If lovers of God are to hate evil (Ps 97:10), then how much more will God!? This includes all God's moral, rationale, personal beings who ARE inherently evil. The reason there is so many evil acts in the world is because there are so many evil people in it. Remove the evil people from this world, and we'll have heaven here on earth!

John 16:-27
27 No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.
NIV

Once again in this passage, God's love is limited to those who love Jesus. It's limited to those who love Jesus.

Now for that explicit conditional which, too, limits God's love:

John 15:10
10 If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father's commands and remain in his love.
NIV

So, you UAB's need to come up with at least one explicit text that clearly, plainly, unequivocally states that God also loves sinners, the wicked, lawbreakers, workers of iniquity, evildoers, or some such equivalent phrase. But I tell you beforehand, you won't find such a passage because that would present a serious contradiction, since another thing God can't do is lie!

Furthermore, who in his right mind would implicitly trust such a god who supposedly loves evil as much as he loves good or righteousness? I trust God and love Him because scripture tells me that he loves only what is good, holy, righteous, virtuous, etc. And I can say "ONLY" because there are no explicit proof texts to the conrary! So, you UAB's stick that in your lunch bucket and chew on it!

 

[Doran]

Your discourtesy tells more about you than it does about God.

Not anywhere close, though, to all the false statements you have made about me.

 

[Doran]

974 - 12/17/22

Doran: Now, I asked this question because John 10 teaches that Jesus knows all his sheep. He knows them so well that he not only knows each of them by name but knows them like he knows his Father! It certainly sounds like Jesus has a very deep, personal, intimate knowledge of his sheep -- all those who the Father has given to him. The Gr. word "ginosko" which is translated "know" is quite an interesting word. It has so many nuances to it that Vine devoted more than a page worth of definitions to it, citing numerous bible references for each. So, I'm just going to quote a portion of the definition from Vine that certainly applies to John 10:

Josiah: Addressed.

The context here is faith, not the Cross.

I guess we're suppose to assume that here again, Jesus was being SO misleading (according to you never did God get this right). We're suppose to assume what Jesus was suppose to say (but goofed) is "I will die ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for my sheep - which is a tiny few." He kind of goofed when He spoke about having that special relationship with those who have faith in the Cross....

John 10 covers a lot more than just faith. How about this:

John 10:11
11 "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep
NIV

And,

John 10:15
and I lay down my life for the sheep.
NIV

And,

John 10:17
17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life — only to take it up again.
NIV

And,

John 10:18
18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again.
NIV

So...if my count is right, five times in this passage it's stated that he lays down his life. Yet, in spite of these passages, you, presumbably with a straight face, tell us that the context of the passage is "NOT THE CROSS"!! Wow! Thank you very much for proving what I've been saying all along. You are so heavily invested into the limited atonement heresy that this presupposition that you bring to so many passages has literally blinded you to the contexts of those passages -- so much so that you cannot see a truth even when it's stated multiple times within a passage.

I rest my case. Again, thank you for proving my point. I almost feel indebted to you.

But moreover, the megabytes of irony here is that while you so desperately want "faith" to take center stage in John 17, the passage very clearly teaches that faith is a consquent of being sheep! The status of people being made sheep instead of goats, let's say, results in them believing. And this makes perfectly good sense in light of what Paul said in 1Tim 1:14

1 Tim 1:14
14 The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.
NIV

Of course, you don't like this passage any more you do Rom 8:39 and probably even less than Phil 1:29, as well, but unless you can produce one that says faith and love and grace are found outside of Christ, then I think were' on very solid biblical ground to say that faith, love and grace are found ONLY IN Christ. This nicely explains how the chosen sheep came to saving faith. They were simply predestined in Christ in eternity. And what God predestined in eternity is sure to be fulfilled in temporal reality.

P.S. John10 is universally known as the Good Shepherd Discourse. Not the Good Faith discourse. Just sayin'....

 

[MoreCoffee]

Not anywhere close, though, to all the false statements you have made about me.

What statements would those be?

 

[Doran]

More on John, folks.

John 15:13-16a, 19b
13 Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. 14 You are my friends IF you do what I command. 15 I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. 16 You did not choose me but I chose you....19 As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.
NIV

This very explicit passage presents at minimum four thorny problems for universal atonement:

1. Jesus apparently died [only] for his friends.
2. Jesus' friends are the elect which he personally chose in space and time
3. By Jesus laying down his life for his friends he exemplified the greatest love anyone could have
4. Jesus makes no mention of laying down his life for those who hate him and his Father.

Number 4 gives me license to postulate number 1. After all, Jesus explicitly mentions the God-haters in this chapter and they very obviously are excluded from Jesus' circle of friends. Ergo...Jesus died only for the elect...for the the ones he chose to befriend.

This fact also explains quite neatly why Jesus did not pray for the world in John 17 and why he limited his prayer to only the Father's elect. In fact, God's elect is very much on Jesus' mind in various atonement-related passages in John. See Jn 10:15-16 which talks about two flocks of sheep (Jews and Gentiles). Now compare those passages with Jn 17:9, 20 which also speaks about two groups of elect -- which can only be Jews and Gentiles as well.

But perhaps the most convincing and condemning thing for UABs is what Jesus said about how there was NO greater love than this. This statement is exceedingly counter-cultural, counter-limited atonement, and counter-universal love because one would reasonably and logically think that the greatest love of all would be that Jesus died for his enemies as well, since Jesus teaches us in the Sermon on the Mount to love our enemies! But here we have it right from the horse's mouth -- Jesus himself tells us that he lays down his life [only] for his friends, and in John 17, it's obvious now that he prayed for his only for his friends. And in addition to all this, Jesus said he lays down his life presumably only for his sheep, since there's no mention of any goats.

Couple all these very plain and explicit teachings with several others in the NT such as Act 20:28, 1Cor 6:20; 7:23; Eph 5:2, 25, Gal 3:13-14, Tit 2:14; 1Jn 3:16 etc. and we have very compelling evidence that Jesus died ONLY for the elect of which their number is so large, no man can count (Rev 7:9).

 

[Josiah]

But You didn't answer my question re John 10 and Mat 7:23: How can Jesus have a special relationship with his sheep (know them personally and intimately), even though they're still sinners, and yet not with the evildoers, especially since faith isn't in view in the Matthew passage? Or are you saying that because the sheep first chose Christ and first chose to believe in him that as a consequence of such choices God then gave these people of faith to his Son? But even then, it would be absurd to say that Christ died for those who he NEVER knew in eternity. What would be the point of Christ dying for anyone when he determined in eternity that he would never have a relationship with them to BEGIN with!?

@Doran


1. Questions aren't substantiation.

2. No one would care less what "makes sense" to you. Or anyone.

3. Your position is that Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY for some few. When you find GOD saying what you do, quote the verse.




Your view: Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY for some.

To quote YOU:

Provide definite proof texts.

what is required is specific and explicit passages that states that.

Stop all the diversions and hijacks.
Stop all the questions (they only show you have nothing to offer).
Stop all the games.
No need for EVEN MORE, EVER MORE evidence that Scripture never says what you do.

Just do what you yourself insist must be done.

We'll wait.




.




.

 

[MoreCoffee]

1. Jesus apparently died [only] for his friends.
2. Jesus' friends are the elect which he personally chose in space and time
3. By Jesus laying down his life for his friends he exemplified the greatest love anyone could have
4. Jesus makes no mention of laying down his life for those who hate him and his Father.

#1 is not what the passage says. The passage says that one is Jesus' friend if one obeys his commandments.

If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love: as I also have kept my Father's commandments and do abide in his love. These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and your joy may be filled. This is my commandment, that you love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends, if you do the things that I command you. I will not now call you servants: for the servant knoweth not what his lord doth. But I have called you friends. because all things, whatsoever I have heard of my Father, I have made known to you. You have not chosen me: but I have chosen you; and have appointed you, that you should go and should bring forth fruit; and your fruit should remain: that whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.​

John 15:10-16
Are you Jesus' friend as evidenced by doing the things that Jesus commands you to do? Is Total depravity consistent with an affirmative answer, and if so how so?

#2, #3, #4 are theological empire building that is not taught in the passage.

 

[Doran]

Josiah: @Doran


Y

We shared our MANY Scriptures. I know, your superior brilliance to Christians for over 1500 years insists what God so often states on this "cannot" be true... but we've given MANY Scriptures that verbatim STATE our position - the wonderful, gospel position of traditional, historic Christianity (affirmed by an Ecumenical Church Council). You have given nothing. Just your "cannot be" opinion, your absolute eisegesis of adding words to the texts (words absolutely essential to your position) but words you prove aren't actually there and that entirely change the verse (often reversing it). You just leave us wondering how God can ALWAYS be SO wrong (He never gets it right on this topic!) and how YOU can unquestionably be SO right (you speak of your superior abilities). But, you said you'd accept proof texts. And we agreed. We gave some. You haven't.

Of course, you want me to stop. You have no answers to tough questions -- all of which have been related to the atonement in one sense or another. The only passages you have provided for proof texts are the more OBSCURE ones that allow you to read your presuppositions into them, such as Jn 3:16, Heb 2:9. 1Jn 2:2, etc. Do you know what the difference is between explicit and obscure? Look at all the passages that I have proved that EXPLICITLY state "many"; yet, to date you have not bothered to reconcile the "many" all your so-called "all" passages.

You sound like a little kid in a schoolyard who whines and complains to a bully because he's always picking on him. Well...here's a clue for you: That bully will never stop picking on you unless you retreat for good under some rock OR you stand up to him. So...be a man, already! Gird up the loins of your God-given mind and stand up to my vigorous line of questioning and quit whining like a little kid.

I have already provided numerous explicit texts to make my various points. But since you are totally unable to produce any specific passages that explicitly counter mine, then I can only logically infer that Christ died only for his Father's elect. It's very simple. Take the John 15 passage where Jesus EXPLICITLY stated he lays down his life for his friends who he chose. Very specific. Very explicit. Very clear. Very plain. Now...what you need to do is come up with a passage that just as explicitly states the opposite! For example, Jesus died for all sinners. Or Jesus died for his enemies, too. Or Jesus died for each and every person in the world. Or Jesus "tasted death" for everyone in the world. Or Jesus atoned for the sins of people the Father never gave him, or some other equivalent formula. One would reasonably think that since the Holy Spirit so was so specific and explicit on various topics on one end of the theological spectrum that He would have been been just as specific and explicit on the other end! Yet, all I get from you is crickets.

Your position is so intellectually bankrupt you can't even tell me why would Christ have prayed only for the elect in John 17 and not the entire world that you allege he died for!

And you have already proved how blinded you are by your presuppositions since you are totally unable to see that the Cross was very much on Jesus' mind in John 10. You denied this fact and insisted that the central focus of the passage is faith, even though there are at least 5 references to Jesus' death in that passage. And you expect any thinking person here to take you and what you believe seriously?

May I be so bold as to suggest that you take Peter's exhortation to heart in 1 Pet 3:15 -- "to be prepared to give an answer to everyone who ASKS..." Or what about Paul when he told Timothy to STUDY to show himself an approved workman of God so that he will handle the word of God accurately (2Tim 2:15). Why do you think he would tell Timothy, who he also exhorted to teach others, if Paul didn't think that plenty of questions would be tossed at his protege as he preached the gospel? I don't believe we'll find any exhortations in scripture to duck or avoid hardball players, or to whine or complain to them that their line of questioning is irrelevant or unreasonable. Besides, God approves of courageous people , not cowards (Deut 31:6-7; 2Chron 19:11; Act 27:22, 25; 1Cor 16:13; Rev 21:8).

 

[Albion]

Of course, you want me to stop. You have no answers to tough questions -- all of which have been related to the atonement in one sense or another.

Give it up already. The answer has been provided by more than one person...and many times over.

The Atonement was not a 'blank check' for salvation.

Anyone who can ignore the role of Faith or, in another poster's case, pretend that it is nothing more than something incidental that a person feels upon realizing that he's the recipient of a lifetime "Free Pass" to heaven...is not engaged in a discussion of this topic.

 

[Doran]

#1 is not what the passage says. The passage says that one is Jesus' friend if one obeys his commandments.

If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love: as I also have kept my Father's commandments and do abide in his love. These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and your joy may be filled. This is my commandment, that you love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends, if you do the things that I command you. I will not now call you servants: for the servant knoweth not what his lord doth. But I have called you friends. because all things, whatsoever I have heard of my Father, I have made known to you. You have not chosen me: but I have chosen you; and have appointed you, that you should go and should bring forth fruit; and your fruit should remain: that whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.​

John 15:10-16
Are you Jesus' friend as evidenced by doing the things that Jesus commands you to do? Is Total depravity consistent with an affirmative answer, and if so how so?

#2, #3, #4 are theological empire building that is not taught in the passage.

What do you think v. 13 is saying: That he didn't lay down his life for anyone?

Also, are you saying that Jesus' atoning death will only accrue to them on the basis of their obedience? That they must earn their salvation? They must merit it on the basis of their works obedience? I thought salvation was by grace and not works, no?

And why shouldn't Jesus make his friendship with his elect conditioned on their obedience? After all, they were called in sanctification (1Thess 4:7), weren't they? And Didn't Jesus teach that his Father loved him because he obeys him (Jn 10:17)? Can Jesus be the friend of the world (for which supposedly he died) when we are told that we disciples cannot have friendship with the world because such is hatred (or enmity) toward God (Jas 4:4)? Can Jesus hate his Father?

The FACT that Jesus places conditions on his friendship strongly supports my position, not yours! I have repeatedly said that, since love is the most excellent and highest moral virtue of all, then God cannot possibly love what IS evil, which according to scripture is also ALL mankind because all men are sinners. This is precisely why God cannot love anyone outside of Christ. He CAN only love those who are in his Son on the basis of His righteousness and holiness. God can only love those whose FEDERAL HEAD is the Last Adam. He cannot love those whose federal head is Adam. And all the non-elect in the world are in Adam!

Try to understand what I'm about to say. I know it's going to be difficult because it involves eternity....and when it comes to things eternal, all of us have a tough time wrapping our finite, hopelessly time-bound minds around such truths. But here goes: When God chose his elect in eternity, he never viewed them as sinners! He saw in them only the imputed righteousness of his dearly beloved righteous Son. After all, aren't God's eyes too pure to behold evil (Hab 1:13)? How we can know this is that Christ only knows His sheep (the elect). He never knew the non-elect according Mathew 7. Besides, meditate Rom 8:29-30. God in eternity only knows those He predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son. He knows NO OTHER!

And to briefly answer you last question: Yes, Total Depravity is totally consistent with the other four Doctrines of Grace. How? Because God's elect, certainly in this New Covenant economy, have been the objects of God's supernatural power in terms of being born again! As such, we been made partakers of the divine nature by the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit (2Pet 1:4). We have been given that new heart that was promised in Jeremiah 31. In other words, God graciously and supernaturally transforms his chosen people from the inside out -- literally! And all this changes the way we think and act and live.

As far as points 2, 3 and 4, which I already explained in my 985, all I can tell you is that I can't make you understand it. Since there is no greater love than love for friends for whom Christ died, then does this mean he loves the non-elect, for whom he did not die, less -- or maybe not at all? You see...you have to ponder, meditate and think through the implications and ramifications to passages. God's word is NOT skim-read or speed-read material!!! It's spiritual truth that must be slowly and deliberately absorbed into mind, body and spirit.

Finally, unless you or someone here can provide chapter and verse proof that explicitly says that Jesus also died for his enemies, or for sinners, or for the wicked, or some other equivalent formula., then in the absence of such proof, one can logically and confidently assert that Christ died only for his friends, i.e. His Father's elect.

 

[Doran]

Give it up already. The answer has been provided by more than one person...and many times over.

The Atonement was not a 'blank check' for salvation.

Anyone who can ignore the role of Faith or, in another poster's case, pretend that it is nothing more than something incidental that a person feels upon realizing that he's the recipient of a lifetime "Free Pass" to heaven...is not engaged in a discussion of this topic.

Never said it was. And I never ignored faith. More false innuendos/claims.

Anyhoo -- it can never be said of you that you have missed your calling....................in apologetics.

P.S. Do you think the folks in Rev 7:9 are saints? If so, did Christ die for them or not? Just askin'....

 

[Albion]

Never said it was. And I never ignored faith.

You certainly have done so in your explanations of the Atonement. I just checked a few of your most recent rants--long, repetitive ones--and the word is never even used!

That, despite the fact that every significant Christian denomination considers Faith to be the means by which salvation comes (some of those churches holding that it is in conjunction with Works as well, but not in place of it).

And in your treatment...nothing. Just as I noted.

What is important about this is not that you are just theologically out of touch, but that the key to settling the issue that's gone back and forth for dozens of postings here is conspicuously absent from your posts.

You don't deny its importance, but it's simply never addressed. That's the case, even when you are responding a post that has spotlighted the importance of Faith!

You know that to respond to that, even negatively, would illustrate the deficiencies in your own position.

 

[MoreCoffee]

#1 is not what the passage says. The passage says that one is Jesus' friend if one obeys his commandments.

Are you Jesus' friend as evidenced by doing the things that Jesus commands you to do? Is Total depravity consistent with an affirmative answer, and if so how so?

And to briefly answer you last question: Yes, Total Depravity is totally consistent with the other four Doctrines of Grace. How? Because God's elect, certainly in this New Covenant economy, have been the objects of God's supernatural power in terms of being born again! As such, we been made partakers of the divine nature by the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit (2Pet 1:4). We have been given that new heart that was promised in Jeremiah 31. In other words, God graciously and supernaturally transforms his chosen people from the inside out -- literally! And all this changes the way we think and act and live.

Are you one of "the elect"?

 

[Doran]

Okay...the other day I basically promised that I would tackle one of UAB's most cherished "proof texts", i.e. Heb 2:9. I have already taken considerable wind out of their sail re this passage by pointing to a very obvious fact (except to them) that the term "everyone" is not quantified in the text; for it does not say "everyone in the world." And I further pointed out that since this is the case, then this leaves the door open to understanding "everyone" in a qualitative, limited sense. And so now, I will make my case for such an understanding. I will easily, without breaking a sweat, demolish a UAB stronghold without ever leaving chapter 2; for while other passages outside this chapter also do much harm to UAB's interpretation, for the sake of brevity I will limit my observations to this chapter. But first the passage under consideration:

Heb 2:9
9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
NIV

I now make these following exegetical observations:

1. Evidently, in "tasting death for everyone" Jesus is "bringing many sons to glory" (v.10). So, coming right out the chute, we see the limiting adjective "many". Not only that but Jesus death was limited to bring "many SONS" to glory. This death, then, was quite effectual for those who were the objects of Jesus' redemptive work. Faith is not in view in this chapter; for the focus is on Christ's atoning work -- not the response of the objects.

2. Furthermore, this death that Christ tasted had a limited scope -- to God's family (vv.11,12) -- "are of the same family", "call them brothers", "I will declare....to my brothers", "in the congregation". So, it makes sense that the writer used the adjective "many", since the entire world is not a member of God's family. And this explains the absence of "everyone in the world" in v.9.

3. The writer further elaborates on the spiritual status of God's family with "and the children God has given me" (v. 13). It's very obvious that Christ tasted death for everyone who is elect (cp. Isa 53:10, Jn 10:29; 17:6-12)!

4. Verse 16 is a fascinating verse, as it reads in the KJV, "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he [Christ] took on him the seed of Abraham." (A book could be written on this verse alone!) In short, "the seed of Abraham" is the godly seed. It is God's covenant people. It is the "children of promise" (Gal 4:28). Moreover, the "seed of Abraham" descended from the Woman's godly seed -- the same seed who produce The Seed who would ultimately crush Satan's head one day (Gen 3:15). All these generations were GODLY. Why this is so important is that writer of this epistle didn't say merely that he took on the seed of Adam or of any man! Christ was NEVER in Adam, who himself was a seed of the Serpent. Nor are Christ's brothers and sisters in Adam! It's not Adam's seed that Christ helps (by atoning for) but is limited strictly to Abraham's seed.

5. What I just said in the last sentence above explains v. 17 -- "For this reason he had to made just like his brothers", i.e. the godly seed. In short, Christ has NEVER been and is NOT and NEVER will be connected in any way, shape or form to Adam or his seed! Therefore, Christ never "tasted death" for Adam's seed but for God's elect godly seed which began with Eve in the Garden (by divine decree I would remind everyone), and then her godly descendant Abraham, and then from Abraham to David -- all of whom were God's chosen covenant people!

6. Finally...the writer of Hebrews reinforces what I just wrote above by saying , "that he might make atonement for the sins of the people." (v.17). Note, again, it doesn't say ALL the people. Or all the people in the world. The entire passage limits Christ's atonement to God's chosen, covenant, elect people -- who were always in that state from all eternity by divine decree -- the same way God saved Eve. God sees his chosen, covenant people only through the prism of His Son's righteousness -- an imputed righteousness.

As it is written: Christ is All (Co. 3:11) and again, For from him and through him and to him are ALL things (Rom 11:36)

Hallelujah! What an awesome God!

 

[Doran]

Are you one of "the elect"?

Absolutely by the grace of God! And the entire epistle of 1 John tells me how I can KNOW this. What about you?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Absolutely by the grace of God! And the entire epistle of 1 John tells me how I can KNOW this. What about you?

I am elect, I am a member of the body of Christ; this is know from objective visible evidence.

You know by what means?

 

[brightfame52]

Doran

4. Verse 16 is a fascinating verse, as it reads in the KJV, "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he [Christ] took on him the seed of Abraham." (A book could be written on this verse alone!) In short, "the seed of Abraham" is the godly seed. It is God's covenant people. It is the "children of promise" (Gal 4:28). Moreover, the "seed of Abraham" descended from the Woman's godly seed -- the same seed who produce The Seed who would ultimately crush Satan's head one day (Gen 3:15). All these generations were GODLY. Why this is so important is that writer of this epistle didn't say merely that he took on the seed of Adam or of any man! Christ was NEVER in Adam, who himself was a seed of the Serpent. Nor are Christ's brothers and sisters in Adam! It's not Adam's seed that Christ helps (by atoning for) but is limited strictly to Abraham's seed.

Let me begin by saying, this is an excellent post, I agree with it except for one point. I believe Adam and Eves seed are the same, In other words Adam is part of the Godly Seed because he and eve are one. Lets read Mal 2:15


And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.

When God Created them Both, He named them both Adam Gen 5:1-2

This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

Now if we read the sacred genealogy of Christ according to the flesh, Its traced back to Adam Lk 3:23-38

23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,

25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,

26 Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,

27 Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,

28 Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,

29 Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,

30 Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,

31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,

32 Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,

33 Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,

34 Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,

35 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,

36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,

37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,

38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

But the contrast is not with Adams seed, but with satans or the serpents seed Gen 3:14-15

14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

So God has designated some of mankind as the serpents seed, like cain for instance. Though cain was their firstborn, Adam and Eve Gen 4:1-2

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.

2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

Nevertheless Eve later disclaimed him as being of her seed, but claimed Seth who had replaced Abel, notice Gen 4:25

25 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

The godly line of election was through abel first, then replaced with seth, cain isnt in the picture. Look at the Lk 3 Genealogy again, cain isnt mentioned but Seth is.

Cain, even though he was a physical descendant of Adam and Eve, nevertheless God designated him a child of the devil, outside of the godly line of election 1 Jn 3:12

12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

Jesus mentioned this in a parable Matt 13:36-39

36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.

37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;

38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

So again, I agreed with everything you said in that post, except what was said about Adam, and told you why !

 

[Doran]

You certainly have done so in your explanations of the Atonement. I just checked a few of your most recent rants--long, repetitive ones--and the word is never even used!

That, despite the fact that every significant Christian denomination considers Faith to be the means by which salvation comes (some of those churches holding that it is in conjunction with Works as well, but not in place of it).

And in your treatment...nothing. Just as I noted.

What is important about this is not that you are just theologically out of touch, but that the key to settling the issue that's gone back and forth for dozens of postings here is conspicuously absent from your posts.

You don't deny its importance, but it's simply never addressed. That's the case, even when you are responding a post that has spotlighted the importance of Faith!

You know that to respond to that, even negatively, would illustrate the deficiencies in your own position.

Well, that's because the question we're discussing is the EXTENT of the Atonement. We're not debating how people must respond to the gospel. The immediate question at hand is: For whom did Christ die? You raise a red herring to distract us and get us off on another tangent. And besides just the other day, I did write briefly on faith. See my 915. If you want to discuss man's responsibility in responding to the gospel, start another thread.

Now...try write something of substance. That would be a breath of fresh air in here.

P.S. And the megabytes of irony to your concern about faith is that it can be accurately said that Christ died only for those who believe in Him.

 

[Albion]

We're not debating how people must respond to the gospel.

Well, your side isn't, which is why it either won't discuss Faith or else minimizes Faith's role in salvation.

The immediate question at hand is: For whom did Christ die?

...which confirms what I pointed out in the previous post and at the top of this one!

 

[Albion]

Well, that's because the question we're discussing is the EXTENT of the Atonement. We're not debating how people must respond to the gospel.

You are not, that's true. And I pointed out why you will not discuss it.

That's because taking up the matter of a belief and trust in Christ as Lord would fatally undermine your theory that Christ died for only a few souls who were guaranteed salvation irrespective of how they chose to live their lives, either in accord with Christ's teachings or completely unmoved by them.