did Christ die for the sin of unbelief?

Simple, Sins are not charged against believers in Jesus because according to Jesus in his discourse with Nicodemus, believers are not judged! However, that said, there is a judgment of deeds. Lets see what the bible says are deeds. Deeds include both good works and sins committed, and all deeds will be tested as if in fire. That which is good comes through the fire in the manner that gold, silver, and precious stones survive fire. That which is bad, or sin, does not survive the test in fire but rather is consumed in the manner that wood, hay, and stubble are consumed by fire. The one who's deeds are tested by fire, survives as if through fire. that is when deeds are consumed you have nothing left, you are destitute of anything of value. If your good works are tested, they come through the fire and you have the true value of your deeds to lay at the feet of Jesus.

With both good works and sins dealt with, the final judgment of man is based solely upon the faith condition of the individual...You either have faith or you do not have faith. If you have faith in Jesus, you are not judged because you are sanctified by your faith. If you have no faith, it is your sins that convict you and cause you to be cast into the lake of fire. The root cause however is "lack of faith" because if you have faith, you will seek forgiveness for your sins. Without faith, who do you have that can forgive you your sins?

 

Helen, I said nothing volatile in my original post, so I am trying to be very polite about this idea here.

The Scriptures tell us that Christ died for several reasons (all of them are not listed here):

1. To destroy the works of the evil one (I John I think)
2. To crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15)
3. To be a ransom for many (Mark 10)
4. To be the propitiation for the whole world (I John 2)
5. To provide justice and be the justifier (Rom. 3)
6. To obtain a greater name (Phil. 2)
7. To become Lord of the living and the dead (Romans 14)

Okay, you get the idea. He didn't just die that people may be forgiven of their sins.

When Christ died, he died and PAID in full the sin debt owed to God. I don't think anyone disagrees with this. In other words, Christ's sacrifice was completely sufficient to satisfy the justice of God.

We know that the sacrifice of Christ is only efficient for those who are/will be justified. Those who never believe will never taste of his goodness, only his wrath.

Now, how is my exegesis faulty in Revelation 21:8, where it lists unbelief with about 7 other reasons why people will be sent into the Lake of Fire?

 

Kaydee,

I steered you vaguely with the 2 timothy scripture..sorry

"death" was still abolished by Jesus Christ for all of mans sins even if the previous context specifically mentions those "called". if death is defeated then it is defeated for all men. for all men are cursed and contain sin.

yet, if you lean backwards a little and find in 1 timothy, as paul speaks of all men being "saved".

(meaning all sin in their lives forgiven).

1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

states it in a different way.

If Jesus Christ is declared lord and every knee bow and tounge confess that this is true. would you think he would have to proove this to everyones satisfaction?.

(meaning that death would have to be proven defeated and powerless in everyones life..or that everyone recognizes that sin no longer exists within them)

Me2

 

Yelsew

I think you may have misunderstood what I said. I have no problem with your first paragraph - I agree fully.

Exactly - that is my point. How could Christ have died for everyone's sins, even unbelievers, and then charge them (unbelievers) for the same sins all over again at the Great White Throne Judgment?

In His Grace
KayDee

 

And the sweater is still yours.

Bro. Dallas

 

Bro. Curtis said:

If my mom gives me a sweater, and I never wear it, I never benefit from her gift. But she still gave me the sweater.

More faithfully to the Gospel, if your mother paid all your bills for you, you benefit from her gift because whether you "accept" it or not, you are no longer in debt.

 

If you are lying in prison and the judge pardons you fully, whether you believe the messenger or not, you remain pardoned. It is belief of this that releases you from your prison cell. The declaration of your pardon is not changed.

Bro. Dallas

 

If your mom gave you a sweater, knowing that you would love it and knowing that it was the right circumstances for it, why wouldn't you wear it???

You guys are all pretending like God is so useless as to have create unwilling robots. I reject that. Not only are we not robots, we are made in the image of God, with emotions, will, and intellect. God changes those things to bring people to salvation. He does not work apart from them. And no one, having grasped the reality of their new life will fail to come.

Nor does he keep those who are willing from coming. This is the part you just won't accept for some strange reason. When God said, "Whosoever will may come," he meant that they have to "will" to come. If they don't will, they don't come. How simple is that????

Those who don't come, don't come because they are not willing. Helen wants to claim the law of non-contradiction. How is this for you: The non-willing cannot be willing at the same time. Therefore, they don't come because they are unwilling to come. That is the bottom line.

You ignore the clear and explicit Scriptures that say man is unable. You pretend like they don't even exist. Well, we Calvinists are reticent to throw out the Scripture that easily. We believe that all Scripture ought to be dealt with and that all of it ought to be believed.

 

Man is unable to save himself. That is very clear, Larry. But just as clear is the resounding call throughout Scripture to all to come to Christ and be saved. That call is pure mockery if all are not able to come.

About the sweater -- I don't know why someone who would like the sweater would not wear it. But I know it happens...even with sweaters. How much more with the gift of life!

But I know a little more about that one, I think. 1 John says that perfect love casts out all fear. That does indicate, I think, that God's love and fear cannot co-exist in any one part of a person's life.

And if you look why most people do what they do, it is usually because of fear. Money assuages fear of poverty and helplessness. So does power. So does beauty. So does education. Fame also. Fear of the unknown is, I sometimes think, the primary reason for what most people do. And so people are also afraid of God. Afraid of what He may demand, or take away, or lead through. People fear losing what little control they think they have over their own lives.

And then Calvinists come along and say that if they were meant to be saved they would be different from the start so they are probably going to hell anyway. Now that's what I call an invitation to Christ!

Which is why some of us will not only fight what we see as the Calvinist 'mistake' tooth and nail, but will endeavor all the more to make sure that it is Christ living through us and not ourselves, so that at least the people we are in contact with will see a true invitation to Christ and not a theology which only engenders more fear.

About the original question of the thread, "Did Christ die for the sin of unbelief?" He died for all sins, but if a man persists and insists on refusing Christ, Christ has given him that option, and will allow him to have his own way. It is not that Christ has not died for every sin, but that the man has refused the gift of forgiveness and prefers to stand accountable himself.

DD, this is why we are probably both right in this issue. The sin of unbelief is only part and parcel of the other sins that the person refuses to give up. Still, I will maintain that if he believed, the other sins would not only be forgiven but would disappear from that person's life. God truly is faithful to finish the good work He has begun in each of us.

 

Pastor Larry, where does the Scripture say man is unable to respond?

 

massdak, not seeking God is NOT the same as being unable to respond to Him. Christ said He came to seek the lost. Are you saying either that some were not lost or that some could not respond? Or perhaps that Christ was not interested in all the lost? If the last case, please support from Scripture.

 

KayDee. you are not grasping the essence of the situation here.

He does not charge them of anything but not having faith. Their sins are merely contributing factors, they are like the unclean robe as opposed to the faithful persons robe that is washed whiter than snow in the blood of Jesus. Faith, or the lack thereof is the determining factor. We are sanctified in Jesus by our faith in Jesus. The unbeliever is not sanctified, and therefore suffers the second death even though his sins have been atoned. Sins are not a factor in the Salvation equation. Since Jesus' resurrection, that equation is FAITH = SALVATION. You'll notice there is no mention of Deeds, neither good works nor sins, in the equation. That is not to say that deeds are not important, because they are....just not for Salvation which is eternal life!

 

helen it is that man is unwilling given his sin nature look at all the scripture that tells of mans heart and his intention not to seek God in any way. it is God who changes mans heart and mind to seek Him </font>[/QUOTE]God causes everyman to be exposed to himself.

God has given man every possible reason to come to Him.

God has set the banquet table, and has sent out the universal invitation.

God begat a human son who would take upon himself the sins of the world then be sacrificed for those sins to eliminate man's cause of death. Sins are removed from the Salvation equation, giving man life where before, under Adam, Sin was the cause of man's death. Due to God's Gracious gift of Jesus, the atoner, Sins do not cause man's death.

God established that Faith ALONE is the determining factor for Everlasting life, that is, SALVATION.

God did all the work necessary for man's redemption, but He does not force man to believe. He has Given us His word by which we are to believe in His Son and thereby be saved.

 

You were doing great right up till that last sentence. There is no mockery in the call. They are not able to come because of their own sinful choices.

You ask where Scripture says man is not able to respond. REpeating an answer I have given many times, I direct you to Rom 8:5-8 where it is explicit: Romans 8:5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

Those "in the flesh" are very clearly unsaved in the context. And it says they "cannot" and "are not able." That is inability by any definition. Let me head you off by saying that they can exercise faith. Remember that faith is pleasing to God and Scripture says that they cannot please God.

You hang around wierd people then. I have never seen that happen ...

And I think this is the root of your position ... control over your own lives. Rather than admitting God has control, you insist that man must have control or else it is not a "real choice." I agree that it is all about fear of control.

YOu are wrong. Calvinism does not say that. EVeryone is the same at the start ... sinful and alienated from God, hostile towards God, darkened in their understanding, and hard in their heart. God changes that.

But you are not fighting the Calvinist mistake. You are fighting a straw man you made up.

Ridiculous ...

so what did the death of Christ do? Did it pay for sin or simply make a payment available??? The definition of atonement is an actual satisfaction, not a potential one. If he "paid for it" then it is done. It is not about whether we accept it. He did not give the payment to us to give to the Father (a Roman Catholic view essentially); he gave the payment to the Father himself.

But all along you are arguing that we began it when we believed. This verse is a Calvinistic verse. We are the ones who believe that he began it and you are blasting us for such a belief.

 

Thank you for your response, Larry. In order to avoid quoting everything, I am going to try to simply number the responses in the order of the points you gave. I am hoping that will work OK.

1. It is a mockery to call someone to do something that person cannot do. I have a son-in-law who is a paraplegic, in a wheelchair. If someone were to tell him to get up on his feet and run along with everyone else in a race, he simply could not do that. It would be a mockery of his condition. God is not like that. He will not call us to do something we cannot do. When asked what one must do for salvation, the jailer was told "Believe." Did Paul have a supernatural revelation that this jailer was one of the chosen? Or was this simply the universal command for salvation: believe! If that jailer could not have believed because he was not one of the Calvinistic elect, then Paul would have been mocking his condition.

We all make sinful choices, even after we are born again. We are simply not incapable of sin! By what Scripture, then, do you claim that the man who is unregenerate is not capable of the opposite -- having a tendency toward sin but sometimes making good choices?

2. Romans 8 NEVER says that the unbeliever cannot respond to God. It says that his works cannot please God. It says nothing an unregenerate man can do can please God. This is in clear agreement with Isaiah 64:6, as you know. But what Paul is doing in that section of Romans 8 is making a clear distinction between the saved and unsaved, and pointing out that the works of the unsaved cannot save him. But responding in faith is not a work. All work is of God. If responding in faith were a work, then Paul would not be able to say, in Ephesians, that it is by grace, through faith, we have been saved, and NOT BY WORKS.

3. About the sweater. My sister-in-law is one of those weird people. But thanks anyway. If she does not like the giver, it does not matter what the gift is, she will refuse it. People at enmity with God, probably via fear as much as sin itself, will refuse wonderful things -- things that make no sense to us on this side of the fence.

4. God is in control and I am not in the least afraid of that. In fact, my fear is that I might try to grab control away! I know my own tendencies and my prayer when I post or talk to anyone is that it may be Christ speaking through me and not me myself getting in the way. Believe me, please, I depend on God's control. That being said, I don't really appreciate you twisting my meaning.

5. You are avoiding the point about Calvinism not really being an invitation to Christ. You are mocking people who are not on the 'elect' list to 'invite them to Christ', and you are utterly unnecessary to the rest as far as Calvinistic doctrine is concern. God already chose them. But for those who hear of your doctrine, it is a fearful thing. I have seen this fear expressed in a number of emails from those who read these discussions. I have spent a LOT of time reassuring them that when Jesus said "all" who were heavy-laden were invited to come, that He meant it, and that when we read that God so loved the WORLD, that He meant that, too. You folks are doing a lot more damage than you can imagine with your unbiblical doctrines.

6. There is no straw man about what I am fighting. I am fighting the doctrines of Calvinism as expressed by Calvin and other Calvinists themselves. Including Spurgeon, even though he was all over the map on some of the issues.

7. I am amazed that you think my desire to have Christ living through me so people can see His love and kindness is ridiculous. But that's up to you. I guess that marks the difference between you and me in our personal lives in the same way it marked the difference between Calvin and Arminius in theirs (and no, I am not an Arminian).

8. According to the Bible, the death of Christ took away the sin of the world. That debt is paid. Men are not sent to hell for anything Christ already paid for, but rather for refusing Christ Himself.

9. You stated that Philippians 1:6 was a "Calvinist" verse. Give me a break! It is a biblical verse and a promise to everyone who believes that God will not leave them 'half-done' but rather that everyone who believes is predestined to finally be transformed to the image of Christ. THAT is what predestination means. There is not one verse in the Bible which declares predestination unto salvation.

 

Yelsew

I believe that I am but let’s make it simple. The reason many are not saved is their sin of unbelief. However, at the cross Christ has paid the penalty for all sins, past ,present and future for all mankind. Would that not include the sin of unbelief? Don’t you see that a penalty is being paid twice for that man’s sin of unbelief – once by Christ at the cross and another time by the man himself at the second death?

In His Grace
KayDee

 

Perfectly? No.

However, that does not mean that everyone who has an opportunity for adultery chooses it, does it? That does not mean that the unregenerate cannot live lives in which they do their own best to obey them. It's just that obeying the Ten Commandments won't get you to heaven.

One of the saddest things I have experienced is the remarks of those who have hired Christians and refuse to do so again because the pagans often have better business ethics and are more honest.

How do you explain that one?

 

By your definition, not by God's and not by Calvinisms. Man's inability is not God's fault. It is his own fault. That is what you seem so willing to overlook. He can turn to God anytime he wants to. The Bible declares that whosoever will may come. But they have to will. These people don't want to. And it is no mockery to command them to. They can if they want to; they don't want to. Their inability is a moral inability because sin has blinded them and corrupted their minds (cf. Eph 4:17ff).

Not at all. If the jailer was not one of hte biblical elect, then he would not have wanted to believe.

Scripture never says that unsaved man can do no good at all. THat is not total depravity (which you should know because you have bee here long enough). TD says that every bit of man's being is corrupted by sin. He can make good choices, but he does not choose God and he does not make them for God.

You have just contradicted yourself. He cannot please God but he is able to respond to God?? Would you really have us believe that responding to God does not please him???? We may need to be having a different discussion if that is really what you think. You apparently think that there is some sort of difference between pleasing God and pleasing God. I think they are pretty much the same.

Once again you are caught on the horns of a dilemma. Either accept what Scripture says, or make contradictoyr statements to Scripture. You say that nothing an unregenerate man can do can please God. I agree. That is what Romans 8 says. In light of Heb 11:6 and that fact that one cannot please God without faith, unregenerate man cannot even have faith. Therefore, you have just made the Calvinist point.

Christ did say that the work of God was to believe on him whom he sent (john 6:29). I am not sure what you want to do with that clear statement of Christ.

Again, you have made the Calvinist point. When God gives someone life, he changes their likes and dislikes. Therefore, they do not refuse it.

My point was not about your personally, but rather about the arminian demand that man has to be able to be in control of his own destiny. There was nothing personal intended to you directly. I was rather commenting broadly on your position.

I am not avoiding it all. I am instead affirming exactly what Scripture says, that whosoever will may come. I am not mocking anyone and neither is God. People who don't come don't want to come. That is what you keep missing for some reason. I have yet to figure it out. They don't want it.

Not actually. Paul affirmed in 2 Tim 2:10 that preaching was necessary so that the elect might be saved. He was affirming the existence of unsaved elect, who needed to hear the gospel so that they would be saved. So the preaching of the word is absolutely necesssary.

Then you should correct their abberant theology and direct them to Scripture.

I would assure them of the same thing. And I would focus on on the "come." You keep leaving that out, Helen. Why??? Why omit that little part that you don't like. We believe that whosoever will may come. We believe that all who come will find rest. I am getting tired of saying that but you just keep blowing right past it.

I can't imagine how fervent preaching of the biblical text does damage or qualifies for unbiblical doctrine. You have yet to show one verse rightly interpreted that we contradict. We on teh other hand have shown many that you simply ignore or twist to fit your doctrine.

Not in this conversation you aren't, and not in any conversation you have had on this board.

I amazed that you think I said that. But seeing how you read Calvinists in general, I am not all that surprised. Let's take a look at what I actually said, shall we???

What is ridiculous is your implication that we are not preaching a true invitation to Christ and that our theology engenders fear. We don't and it doesn't. Our theology engenders worship and trust in God because we realize that we are fully dependent on him. You have twisted biblical theology to the point that you don't even recognize it. Since you do it to Scripture, I am not surprised that you do it to me. I wish you wouldn't do it to either.

Is refusing Christ not a sin??? If not, then why do people go to hell for it?? If it is, then how is it not a part of "the sin of the world." Is this a case where "all" doesn't mean "all"????

LOL ... The verse says that God began the work. You keep saying man begins it. Calvinists believe that God begins it.

I already debunked this notion many times. You simply don't read or don't follow the text of the Scripture when it is explained.

Once again, you have presented a post full of logical holes and scriptural deficiencies. You continue to address something that we don't believe. You continue to imply that we believe thigns we do not. You continue to miss the plain wording of Scripture in an effort to maintain your position. Why??? That is all I want to know. Why??

[ January 23, 2004, 06:05 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]