arminian question

Limited Atonement?

In the ancient sermon called ‘Second Clement' the preacher said these words. ‘And another Scripture says, I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners. He means this: that it is necessary to save those who are perishing. For this is a great and marvelous thing, to support not those things that are standing but those that are falling. So also Christ willed to save what was perishing, and He saved many when He came and called us who were also perishing.' (The Apostolic Fathers by Michael W. Holmes, Baker Book House p. 69)

In Romans 5:18 we read, ‘Therefore, as by the offence of one (Adam) judgment came on all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one (Jesus) the free gift came on all men unto justification of life. The tiny word, all {pas} means all, any, every, the whole or whosoever. [ Strong's Concordance] God ordained that because of Adam-- all human beings experienced the Fall. If He ordained to save only the elect one might think that He was ineffectual in His plan to redeem only a tiny minority of His created beings.

Do we not find Paul compelling everyone to repent and believe the Gospel? ‘ . . . but now commandeth all men--everywhere to repent.' The Greek word for commands is (aparaglli) meaning He charges, commands, or declares that all people everywhere repent. Would there not be more than a scintilla of deception on the part of our Lord if on one hand He authoritatively, demands all people to repent, and yet in the back of His own mind knows that He has already in eternity past--doomed the majority to an eternity in the regions of the forever, damned?

Paul in writing Timothy reminds him and all other readers of the Word of God in their day, that He ‘ . . .gave Himself a ransom for all, (pas) to be testified in due time.'

Galatians 2:6 points to the issue at hand, that ‘ . . .God accepteth no man's person . . .' Person in the Greek means (prosopon) suggesting the visage from the front view, countenance, appearance, person or face.(Strong's Concordance) His atonement was shed for every person in all of human history , but that atonement is only effectual in those persons who believe in Jesus. The Lord does not play favorites in electing some to Heaven and decreeing the rest of never-dying souls to destruction.

There is a lucid reference in I John 2:2 in making reference to two groups of people. Christ's atonement is more than adequate for the sins of the believers as well as those of the lost. ‘And He is the propitiation for our sins, {the church} and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.' [the lost] The world that spins around the sun does not have sins, but people living in our world do have a proclivity toward sinning.

The concept of a Limited Atonement is the Achilles' heel of Calvinism.

I is unconscionable for anyone to even think that the Lord would damn the majority of all humanity, without relating to this segment of His creation who He created in His own Image and for His glory.

"Ray"

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
The concept of a Limited Atonement is the Achilles' heel of Calvinism.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would encourage you to read through the various threads here. These questions have been dealt with before and every thing you have put up have been answered from Scripture.

In short, the question is Did the atonement accomplish anything or did it only make it possible? If you think it accomplished somethign than you believe in limited atonement. If you think it only made it possible you believe something else.

Limited atonement does not deny that the atonement affects all men; it simply refers to its sufficiency and in that regard, the most rampant arminian (aside from the universalist) believes in limited atonement.

PLease seek to understand the issues and then if you have specific questions feel free to post them one at a time.

 

Pastor Larry & anyone,

Pastor Larry said, ‘Limited atonement does not deny that the atonement affects all men.'

Ray responds: Other limited atonement people that I have heard from are jealous over the fact that Christ only died for His elect. Are you saying by your above statement that Christ's atonement is sufficient for all people but only effective in the elect?

Pastor Larry said, ‘ . . . even the most rampant Arminian believes in a limited atonement.'

Ray responds: No Arminian or Biblical theologian that I have ever met believes in a limited atonement. People who are Biblically correct believe that when a person truly believes in Jesus after being drawn by the Holy Spirit, become an elect person. There is no autonomous God who designates some for one eternal destination or the other less favored place meaning the Lake of Fire.

Before you might ask if I believe in a universal salvation, meaning that no one will finally be put into Hell, the answer is no. The majority of humankind will miss Heaven and end up in Hell, but because of their rebellion against the Lord and their refusal to believe and trust in Him.

I have noticed that Calvinists have an aversion to ever mentioning the reality of a person believing or trusting in Jesus. Without this human response to God's call there would be no one who would ever enter into the felicity of Heaven. Never fear, believing and trusting in Jesus is not working for one's salvation or in no way does it take away from the fact that salvation is totally by His work of grace in our lives.

I would welcome hearing the Calvinist response to my former statements on the board. I sure don't want all that excellent theology to fall by the wayside.

With warm regards,

"Ray"

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Are you saying by your above statement that Christ's atonement is sufficient for all people but only effective in the elect? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is what limited atonement teaches. It shows how unprepared you are to enter this debate. You do not even know what you are arguing against. Common grace is also the result of the atonement and therefore the atonement affects all people.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> No Arminian or Biblical theologian that I have ever met believes in a limited atonement. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you are a universalist??? Of course not. You believe that the atonement is limited to those who believe. The problem is that you cannot come up with a legitimate reason from Scripture why spiritually dead people believe.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>People who are Biblically correct believe that when a person truly believes in Jesus after being drawn by the Holy Spirit, become an elect person.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is a misrepresentation of biblical teaching. You have yet, in all your many posts, to show one verse were election is based on people’s belief. If you are going to claim biblical teaching, then you must show a verse that supports you. Election is never conditioned on belief. You are right however that people believe after being drawn by the Spirit.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I have noticed that Calvinists have an aversion to ever mentioning the reality of a person believing or trusting in Jesus. Without this human response to God's call there would be no one who would ever enter into the felicity of Heaven.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You do not notice very well. You are not reading very well if you believe this. No Calvinist denies this. This has been answered time and time again on this thread. It is pure foolishness for you to say this. Please represent your opponents properly.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Never fear, believing and trusting in Jesus is not working for one's salvation or in no way does it take away from the fact that salvation is totally by His work of grace in our lives. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. But if you read in Acts 13:48 (notice the use of Scripture here), the ones who believe are the ones who are appointed to believe. That is the difference between your position and the biblical one. You say that people believe of their own unaided free will. Scripture says that people believe because they were appointed to believe.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I would welcome hearing the Calvinist response to my former statements on the board. I sure don't want all that excellent theology to fall by the wayside. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As long as people give biblical responses to your posts, excellent biblical theology will not fall buy the wayside.

Ray, I get a little tired of you and others bringing up things that have been shown to be misrepresentations of what your opponents teach. The essence of good argumentation is found in representing your opponent the way he would represent himself and then answering from Scripture. You are not doing that. Please cease this type of misrepresentation and get with the program here.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> In short, the question is Did the atonement accomplish anything or did it only make it possible? If you think it accomplished somethign than you believe in limited atonement. If you think it only made it possible you believe something else. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I hear this one time and time again, and it too, like so many other "questions" is philosophy and is never asked by the Bible. The same with "why spiritually dead people believe." (that's why we "cannot come up with a legitimate reason from Scripture"). Not that scripture leaves it open as to whether the atonment accomplished anything, but the comparison between "accomplished" versus "made possible" as well as the related "redeemed" versus "redeemable" were unheard/not thought of in the Bible. These are arguments conjured up to try to logically prove Calvinism, and it may make for a good debate, but we cannot claim to have debunked the other view biblically with such logic.

 

Ray, When ou Lord died it appeared to the world like a failure and a defeat. Satan thought that he had surely triumphed at last over the seed of woman who was promised to come and brusie his head. The enemies of our blessed Lord thought for sure that it was the last of Him. My friend, Calvary was not the place of defeat and failure. It was the place of victory, achievement,success, and triumph. That's what God says in Colossians 2:15, "And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it." There are some false theories of the atonement of our blessed Lord, let's remember that the Bible says that the world by wisdom knows not God. Also, the cross is foolishness to those religionists who have never been conquered by its power. Here are some unbiblical concepts of the purpose of Calvary. First, the example concept is not taught in the Bible. According to the teaching of the advocates of this view, the success of the work of Christ on the cross is only effectuated by man's will as he reforms, becoming morally improved by emulating Christ's example. They think that this reconciliation is achieved as man conforms to the example of Christ. To them, the death of Christ saves men in the sense that His death shows them the way of obedience and the way of eternal life and serves as an example of life and death, wherby they are inspired to lead a similar life. Second, the martyr concept is not taught in the Bible. The proponents of this theory hold that Christ died only to show men that truth is worth dying for. His death did not put away sin but reveals to us that right principles and truth are worth dying for. They say that it was similar to the death of John Huss or Polycarp. Third, the governmental concept is not taught in the Bible. This theory of the death of Christ teaches that Christ did not suffer the exact penalty of the law of God for His people, but that God accepts His sufferings on the cross as the substitute for the penalty. In reality, the thought is this. In the death of Christ there was no internal principle of the divine nature satisfied-only the necessities of God's government. Fourth, the neo-orthodox concept is not taught in the Bible. This theory advocates that Christ's death was not a subsitution and satisfaction for sin but a revelation of the love of God and the sinfulness of man. Fifth, the "ransom to Satan" concept is not taught in the Bible. This theory teaches that Satan had such claims on man that God only sent Christ to the cross in order to pay a ransom price to him (Satan) and deliver the captives. Only by the payment of the just claims that Satan had on man could man be the free possession of God. Hence, Christ's death paid a ransom to Satan for the release of the captives. Sixth, the general atonement concept is not taught in the Bible. The advocates of the general atonement theory state that christ died for every one of the Adamic family and thereby only made provision for them to be saved if they desired to be. They teach that at Calvary Christ removed the legal impediments of the salvation of all men and thereby made it possible for every person to be saved of their own free will. They say that Christ has provided an atonement for the sins of everyone who has ever lived, is now living, or shall ever live by His death at Calvary, but He leaves it up to them as to whether they will avail themselves of that work and take advantage of it by accepting it. They teach that Christ did not die so as to infallibly secure and guarantee the salvation of anyone, but merely to make it possible for all people. According to this idea, when Christ died, His death alone did not secure the salvation of any individual. This concept forces its advocates to inevitably conclude that either the whole Adamic family will be saved since the atonement is general for the entire universe, or the atonement alone does not save anyone, in that man must do something in order to make it effectual in his behalf. On the one hand you have universalism and on the other hand conditionalism - neither of which seems to square with the teachings of the Bible. Conditionalism is salvation by works - pure and simple. If the atoning work of our blessed Lord and its efficacy are dependent upon anything other than what he did a Calvary, man is saved by something he does, and what Christ did alone was not accepted by God in behalf of sinful man. This view is the most popularly preached and prevalently advocated one today. It's the view that most people want to believe and do believe. This view is just as blasphemous to the blessed work of our precious Lord as any of the other false views presented. The work of my blessed Lord is not a bridge that only goes part of the way across the chasm. All of these erroneous concepts of the work of Christ at calvary fall infinitely short of setting forth the truth and the facts regarding His blessed work and certainly miserably fail in glorifying Him Whose blood satisfied divine justice, relaxed the law of God, and made an expiation for sin. None of these false theories glorify the precious atoning work of the savior. None of these heretical views exalt Calvary as the place where the Redeemer's work alone saves men without anything being added to it or anything being done on their part to make it intrinsically effectual. The purpose of Calvary is not general but specific. He did not come merely to make it possible for all men to have eternal life of their own choosing, but He came to give eternal life to as many as God the Father had given Him(John 17:2). He shall save and give eternal life to all those the Father gave Him before the world began. Yes, there was a definite number who were elected or chosen to be saved, and for these, Christ came to die and for these only. There is a definite people known as the "elect." Their names were written in the Lamb's Book of Life before the foundation of the world (Rev.13:8). Most believe in a limited atonement but they make it dependen upon man's will. I limit the atonement where the Bible limits it, namely, in the purpose, plan, and will of God. I am humbled to know that God reached down and drew me to Himself. Are you also humbled? I hope this helps someone.

 

Pastor Larry,

Question. What good is Common Grace, as you referred to, if it never leads to the salvation of one soul? Isn't this really a ‘smoke screen' suggesting that God offers the Gospel to all, but only the elect will respond through the ‘Effectual call.' Apparently, He is less sincere about His general call, while He really moves with His sovereignty by affecting salvation in His favored elect. The more Biblical view is that He indeed demands ‘ . . . all men every where to repent.' [Acts 17:30]. There is never any partiality expressed from God toward humankind in this important matter of people's eternal souls. [Malachi 1:9; John 6:35; John 16:31; Galatians 2:6].

As you probably know, not all Calvinists agree on everything. So when I make reference as to what others have written, I am not necessarily misrepresenting Calvinistic views. You, however, are correct that I may not be expressing your forte of the spiritual issue on this matter of Common Grace.

Pastor Larry says: ‘The problem is that you cannot come up with a legitimate reason from Scripture why dead people believe.'

Humankind is created in the Image of God and people have an intellect which is capable of understanding the demands of the Gospel. They have a will also with which to respond negatively or positively to the call of the Gospel. [Acts7:51 & John 5:40] Secondly, the Holy Spirit, and the church [ the bride] offer an unfettered and unbiased welcome to every one, with ‘no strings attached.' This is the testimony of the Word of God. The Holy Spirit offers the invitation to all people without personal preference. [Revelation 22:17 & John 3:16 & Acts 10:34-35].

Another truth unsung by Calvinistic theology is this one found in John 1:9. God ‘ . . . lighteth every man that cometh into the world.' Take time to study this thoroughly along with John 1:7. We are told that John the Baptist bore witness to the Light [Jesus] that all men though Him might believe. Please, don't glorify Calvin's views above the Word of the Living God. If you do then you do the same thing that the Catholic church does in elevating their pontifical traditions over that of the Word of God, the Bible.

Pastor Larry says, ‘You have yet in all your many posts to show one verse where election is based on people's beliefs.'

My response: God loved the entire world of people and proved it by His ignominious death on the Cross. The Holy Spirit is also synchronized in this ministry of restoring humankind back to relationship with God. The Spirit of God is active and influences the minds and wills of people, without regenerating or indwelling them. It is our responsibility to offer the Gospel to the lost. The last chapter of the New Testament --in verse seventeen the Holy Spirit Himself calls to the ‘whosoever will . . . let him take . . .' Almighty God cannot elect anyone without the response of human involvement.


First, let me say that in Acts 13:48 the Bible does not say that when the Gentiles were regenerated and made the elect ‘ . . . they were glad and glorified the Word of the Lord . . .' They were intellectually informed and without the blessing of regeneration, still praised God. Immediately, ‘ . . . when the Gentiles heard [that the Gospel was opened to them] they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord . . .'

Notice also in Acts 13:46 that Paul and Barnabas did not say in effect, ‘You were not elected during this time when the Gospel was opened to the Israelites but now your opportunity is over.' On the other hand, they did say, that they had exempted themselves from the felicity of Heaven in the future. In Biblical language, ‘. . . seeing ye put it [salvation] from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, we turn to the Gentiles.' God has limited His sovereignty, by allowing human beings to be involved in salvation or not attentive to their own destiny.

Your supposed iron-clad verse as to unconditional election is found in Acts 13:48. The verse reads, ‘And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord; and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.'

It is a Divine fact that from the eternities past the Godhead knows who will receive everlasting life in Heaven and who will have neglected His unrivaled plan of salvation. He is thoroughly omniscient and has forever known who will be numbered among His elect. By the same token, He has forever identified who will be conscripted before the Great White Throne Judgment, which is the judgment for all of the lost. {sinners}. In the mind of Almighty God, in a real sense, He has already glorified His saints, justified His saints, called His saints, and predestinated us. This predestinating us to eternal life has been accomplished through His Divine foreknowledge, or as the Greek says, via His ‘prognosis.' The Greek word for ‘foreknowledge' is prognosis. [Romans 8:29-30] While He prognosticates the response of the human will, He does not autocratically punish people with the second death. [Revelation 20:14]. His full understanding and determination has been based on whether or not a man or a woman believes. [John 3:16].

This Biblical view protects God from those people who portray the Godhead as a sadistic and unloving God Who, at will, damns those that He selects for this unimaginable place called Hell. Has He not created everyone in His Image? Does He autocratically elect and enjoy the euphoria of punishing forever human beings through His awesome power and authority? Fear not saints, the last sentence offered is purely hypothetical!

The Apostle Paul in his Pastoral Epistles portrays God as having concern and interest in everyone. [I Timothy 2:4 & 6]. Mark down the Word from the Lord sent through his exceptional servant Paul.

‘He wishes all men to be saved,and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.'

‘He gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.'

Regards,

Dr. Berrian

 

T. Nelson,

Thanks, for the refresher course as to my notes written during seminary days. Your views are ones that I remember. If you can remember and understand these theories, I am sure you will bow to the Word of God that says that Christ died for the sins of the believers as well as those of the lost. [I John 2:2]. ‘And He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.' I am also sure that you will concur that this cosmos that we live on -- was not what our Lord was referring to when He said that He died for the sins of the whole world.

No I absolutely do not believe in universalism. The majority will be forever lost and only His elect saints will inherit the promise and reality of everlasting life. Christ's Substitutionary death secured salvation for any person who will but believe with a repentant heart.

My regards,

"Ray"

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> They teach that Christ did not die so as to infallibly secure and guarantee the salvation of anyone, but merely to make it possible for all people. According to this idea, when Christ died, His death alone did not secure the salvation of any individual. This concept forces its advocates to inevitably conclude that either the whole Adamic family will be saved since the atonement is general for the entire universe, or the atonement alone does not save anyone, in that man must do something in order to make it effectual in his behalf. On the one hand you have universalism and on the other hand conditionalism - neither of which seems to square with the teachings of the Bible. Conditionalism is salvation by works - pure and simple. If the atoning work of our blessed Lord and its efficacy are dependent upon anything other than what he did a Calvary, man is saved by something he does, and what Christ did alone was not accepted by God in behalf of sinful man. This view is the most popularly preached and prevalently advocated one today. It's the view that most people want to believe and do believe. This view is just as blasphemous to the blessed work of our precious Lord as any of the other false views presented. The work of my blessed Lord is not a bridge that only goes part of the way across the chasm. All of these erroneous concepts of the work of Christ at calvary fall infinitely short of setting forth the truth and the facts regarding His blessed work and certainly miserably fail in glorifying Him Whose blood satisfied divine justice, relaxed the law of God, and made an expiation for sin. None of these false theories glorify the precious atoning work of the savior. None of these heretical views exalt Calvary as the place where the Redeemer's work alone saves men without anything being added to it or anything being done on their part to make it intrinsically effectual. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. Not all non-Calvinists reject eternal security.
2. In the Bible, faith is never pictured as some "work man must add to make salvation effectual". It is treated as the very opposite of works instead, and to insist that faith is really a work is only for the purpose of arguing for Calvinism.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The purpose of Calvary is not general but specific. He did not come merely to make it possible for all men to have eternal life of their own choosing, but He came to give eternal life to as many as God the Father had given Him(John 17:2). He shall save and give eternal life to all those the Father gave Him before the world began. Yes, there was a definite number who were elected or chosen to be saved, and for these, Christ came to die and for these only. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And keeping in mind that those who will be saved are the few, not the many, this doesn't seem like a Gospel at all. It sounds like God is unable to save most anyway, or He gets pleasure in damning most. Either way, we have serious problems, so we should admit that we cannot completely understand why individual people will be saved or not saved in the end. We should just follow our commission to win who we can. That is all that is entrusted to us.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eric B:


I hear this one time and time again, and it too, like so many other "questions" is philosophy and is never asked by the Bible. The same with "why spiritually dead people believe." (that's why we "cannot come up with a legitimate reason from Scripture"). Not that scripture leaves it open as to whether the atonment accomplished anything, but the comparison between "accomplished" versus "made possible" as well as the related "redeemed" versus "redeemable" were unheard/not thought of in the Bible. These are arguments conjured up to try to logically prove Calvinism, and it may make for a good debate, but we cannot claim to have debunked the other view biblically with such logic.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to you, no difficult questions are posed by Scripture, nor answered by them. Yet you would proffer answers to them anyway in opposition to the Calvinist's TULIP; we say, along with the Bible, that man is totally depraved, you do not; we say, along with the Bible, election is unconditional, you say it is conditioned upon believing; we say, along with the Bible, that Christ died to save the elect, you say he died to make salvation possible; we say, along with the Bible, that the Spirit irresistibly draws all those the Father has given Christ, you say no; we say, along with the Bible, that we are preserved by the grace of God unto salvation, and you say believers are preserved by their own generated faith.

The question is not one of philosophy, as has been shown over and over, but of what the Scriptures say. The philosophy argument is a red herring and ad hominem: those Calvinists are silly philosophers. It is the non-Calvinist who argues from human logic and presuppositions instead of letting Scripture speak for itself.

It is "God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did" (Rom 4:17). Dead men do not regenerate themselves.

Isa 53:5 says:

5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.

Have all in the world had their transgressions atoned for? Have ALL had their iniquities removed? Do ALL people now have peace with God? Are ALL people healed?
If so, then all the world is saved, i.e., universalism is true. If ALL have been atoned for, how can any then be sent to hell, to pay the price for their sins of which Christ has already paid?

Arminians accuse the Calvinist's God of unfairness for electing a few to salvation, but they see no unfairness in their own god who mocks atonement by forgiving their sins at Calvary and them condemning the sinners anyway.

John 10:14-15 (ESV)
I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, [15] just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep.

[ January 28, 2002: Message edited by: Chris Temple ]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> According to you, no difficult questions are posed by Scripture, nor answered by them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's not true. just not the deep unanswerable questions Calvinists conjure up to try to stump their opponents and prove reprobation, etc.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> we say, along with the Bible... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You interpret the Bible to teach most of these things-- with philosophical arguments.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> you say he died to make salvation possible <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This is the trick. You put it in a way that sounds "unbiblical", because the Bible doesn't speak in terms of "possibility". But this doesn't mean that that isn't the way it is. Isn't salvation "possible" in your scheme? Yes, it's "possible" only for some, though.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> and you say believers are preserved by their own generated faith. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No I do not say this. As I said, not all non-Calvinists believe that.
In fact, I do not dogmatically assert all of the things you have just said. Yes, there is a concept of election in the Bible, but what I say is that we don't understand how it will work out. You say "We know; God just elects some of us, and lets the rest go to Hell with no chance of salvation, then some of you argue among yourselves whether they were elected to Hell, or deny this and just say "passed over", but still call them "vessels of wrath fitted for destruction". When this is questioned, then and only then do you confess it is above our full knowledge. That is our main difference.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> It is the non-Calvinist who argues from human logic and presuppositions instead of letting Scripture speak for itself. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
But that's what you are doing, and calling it scriptural reasoning. Human logic says that ig God doesn't decree anything, He is weak, or that if He paid for all, and some are still lost, He "mocks atonement by forgiving their sins at Calvary and them condemning the sinners anyway." That is not scriptural reasoning. And in answer to that question, I would say that it lies once again in the paradox between our world of time and God's world. Suffice it to say, anyone can be saved, but those who did nore receive Him, their sins will not have been paid twice, but somehow Christ's payment will not have applied to them, because they were not covered by the blood. We are in a world of time, not in God's timeless realm. You cannot read salvation history like it is completely outside of time, because in dealiong with us, God interacts with the time, even though He is not confined in it. He has not asked any of us to try to tell it from His viewpoint where everything has been said and done. Now I can't completely explain this, but that is the only way to square with all the scriptures and not wind up with a god who looks to damn people; and takes pleasure in sending people to Hell He refused an opportunity to repent, yet still holds them accountable for not repenting; and then try to force this theory into scriptures like Romans 9. That seems alot worse than the things you accuse the "arminian" "god" of, and contradicts many scriptures.