Jesus Christ: Did He Ever Save Anyone, Really ?

But it seems you would like to indicate that the finished work of the cross is not effectual for everyone.

But the scriptures say it is finished because He did die for everyone:

2 Corinthians 5:15 (King James Version)
15And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.

And we also see that God wants all to be saved:

1 Timothy 2:4 (King James Version)
4Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

But because you seem to feel Jesus only died for "His people" then He did not die for all men.
However scripture tells us God wants all to be saved so therefore one gathers from your position that something else must be done for the "all" who are not in your words "His people".

One certainly cannot disagree with the above.

This is the whole crux of the matter for the disagreement is not in how redemption takes place; but in when it takes place.

Christ said He died for all men and I have no problem in believing just that and it is finished.

Except those who do not obey (Heb 5:9) and believe in the death, burial, and resurrection.

The B's would term it in a more Biblical sense by saying:
"none of those whom He foreknow from the foundation of the world that would be open to the free gift of salvation will be left out,....."
And I say the above with all confidence that God will get His message to whomever He knows will be open to the message.

Here I would refer you to the passages that teach salvation is brought about by the Faith of Christ, not man's personal faith in Christ.
And I do disagree with those who would place the work of repentance before belief for the scriptures tell us belief is not a work.
But hey, I know of a few of the C's, even here, that place repentance before belief.
I suppose to them it does not matter for they feel anyone who repents does so because they were already saved before they were even born.
They seem to put folks "in Christ" before birth, then Christ loses them at birth because the scriptures say they are "in Adam", then somehow Christ regains them and places them back "in Christ".

 

"""" but the friuit of the spirit is rancor,despondence, antagonism, rudeness,harshness and lack of self-control""""

Why must the calvinist/non-calvinist debate always turn into a discourse of diabtribes?

"Since we live by the spirit, let us keep in step with the spirit. Let us not become concieted, provoking and envying each other"

 

I believe you present a false dichotomy here. Salvation is one 'thing' with many aspects to it (election, regeneration, faith, atonement, repentance, justification, etc.), but those aspects should not be separated to the degree that you attempt here. There are not two 'salvations.'

 

Well, the problem is that Pinoybaptist thinks that faith is a work which it is not. Jesus did do all the work necessary for salvation, but man must place faith in this finished work.

Faith is a ceasing from work or self-effort. Faith is simply trusting or relying on the work Jesus completed.

Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Both of these verses tell us that the necessary work of salvation was completed by Christ, but it only profits those who "look" to him in dependence and faith.

The word "look" here is just another way of saying "trust" or "believe". It is used several times in scripture to mean this.

Isa 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

Mic 7:7 Therefore I will look unto the LORD; I will wait for the God of my salvation: my God will hear me.

Jesus did complete the work of salvation, but we must look to or depend upon this finished work.

 

Winman, I agree with you here (although I'm sure we disagree on the gift of faith and other details), but in essence we agree here.

 

Well, that was very kind of you to say.

If we are not trusting or relying on what Jesus did, then we must necessarily be trusting or believing on something else.

But trusting or believing is not a work. It is always difficult to give an analogy, because at some point all analogies fail, but we trust daily.

Let's say you are about to lose your car because you are several payments behind. Your car is due to be repossessed Friday. You happen to tell a friend and he says, "Don't worry, look to me and I will take care of it!" So, you are not really sure what your friend is up to, but you decide to trust him and quit worrying about your car being repossessed. Then you receive a call from the finance company that says your friend has used his credit card to make all your past due payments and late fees and you are paid to date.

Now, what work did you do? Absolutely nothing. You simply believed your friend and trusted him. You quit worrying about the car being repossessed. But you did no work whatsoever. Trusting or believing is not a work, it is relying or depending upon another.

 

I know for a fact that Calvinists give the gospel call and send forth missionaries, but nevertheless it is a known problem. I showed where Spurgeon himself said he had a continuing anxiety over this issue. Here is that part of his sermon where he speaks of this anxiety:

This anxiety is completely understandable. I myself would have great difficulty in telling a large audience "whosoever will may take the water of life freely" if I believed that in reality only a few chosen elect could do so.

Several times Calvinists have been asked why they proclaim the gospel to all people when this can have no effect whatsoever on who is saved or who is not. After all, if your doctrine is true, those who are elect will be effectually called and regenerated whether you preach the gospel or not, and the non-elect will never be able to respond to the gospel. If this is true the preaching of the gospel is rendered meaningless, an exercise in futility.

And the answer I have seen over and over is "because God told us to preach the gospel". Well, that is a good scriptural answer, but it still does not explain away the obvious problem that it is meaningless if your doctrine is true.

On the other hand, to a non-Cal the preaching of the gospel is not meaningless. We believe anyone who hears the gospel can believe it and be saved if he willingly chooses to do so.

And if your doctrine is true, the gospel call to all cannot help but being seen as disingenious and insincere. "Whosoever" doesn't really mean whosoever, but only a few elect. Certainly a very misleading word to use when God could could have easily said, "And the elect may take the water of life freely". Why would God use a misleading word like "whosoever" if he did not sincerely mean this?

So, say what you will, but even Spurgeon recognized this problem and expressed that giving a "free invitation" gave him, and continued to give him at the time he preached this sermon anxiety.

That's good, that shows Spurgeon was a good man who did not want to mislead anyone.

 

It is a good thing we are not talking in person for you to say something like that to me.

You are an arrogant, misguided Christian. It is one thing to have a weird belief, but then to assign those who disagree with you as being preached to by the devil is beyond the bounds.

The administrators here allow you to say things like this, because they are also seeped in the false doctrine of Calvinism, but they will not allow us who disagree to respond in kind.

 

How many times must you spout this rhetoric? Whether ignorantly or purposefully I do not know.

The bolded portion is completely untrue. God uses His Word preached to call His elect. I have argued this many times. God elected both His people AND the means by which He will bring them to Himself. This means is the preaching of the Gospel.

No "Calvinist" here that I have seen (including pinoybaptist) has ever argued that God's election and His gospel requirement are separable.

The Scriptural command is the primary one, of course. However, if that is the only answer that you think you have received, you have not had enough exposure or you have a short memory.

The reason that I preach the Gospel and believe in its efficacy is that God sovereignly saves His people through it. You don't have to believe that man autonomously contributes in a synergistic effort for his own salvation to believe in the necessity and the efficacy of Gospel preaching.

Jam 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

We must preach the Gospel, but it is God and not us who gets the credit for converts. He takes His word preached and uses it to change hearts of stone into hearts of flesh. He uses His word to rebirth people. He saves His people sovereignly and He saves them using His Word as the means. The two go together--sovereign election and gospel preaching.

I would tack on that all are inherently unwilling and it is of God that any willingly choose.

1Co 1:30 But OF HIM are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
1Co 1:31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

The word whosoever is not the universal term that you make it out to be. It always comes with a qualifier: whosoever believeth, whosoever willeth, etc. The word whosoever has no intrinsic denotation of universal ability. It only indicates specifics. Almost all instances in the New Testament of whosoever X in the Greek are literally "the ones X-ing" or "all the ones X-ing." It never explicitly or implicitly communicates that "everyone CAN X."

Spurgeon also said that one of the reasons he preaches is because God did not give him glasses whereby he could see a yellow stripe down the backs of all elect.

We preach the Gospel because it is the power of God unto salvation. We preach it because God uses us to be a part of bringing His people to Himself. We preach it because He commanded it. We preach it because God "of his own will" begets His people "through the word of truth."

 

At the cross, Christ finished the propitiation for sin. That is what was finished.


1 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.

 

Actually

He will not save the wise and learned but the truth is hidden from them. The truth is that God said He would keep the meek and humble who trust in the name of the Lord.

So it is not those who lean on thier own understanding, but those who trust in Jesus that God will keep. So we can know all we want and never be saved, but those who gling to Christ for thier salvation they will be saved.

We are dead as those who was bitten by the serpent, but when we look to Christ and trust in God not ourself we shall be saved from our condemnation. Just like looking at the bronze snake.

That is why the word tells that whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

So many our drowning because they took thier eyes off Jesus.

God wants to gather us like a Hen gathers Her chicks, but it isn't God who isn't willing it is them.

 

AresMan said:

How is this any different from us non-Cals who say we accepted Christ as our Saviour, but He gets all the credit? Why is it when we say we believe the gospel which you yourself says has the power to save, then you claim we are doing some sort of work?

You say people can only get saved if you go out and preach the gospel.

But then you turn around and say people have nothing to do with other people getting saved, it is 100% the work of God.

But then you say God can't save anybody unless you go out and preach the gospel.

I would think it is very confusing to be a Calvinist.

 

I know exactly what you mean Winman. If only folks would realize that sticking with the truth is not confusing at all. They would also find that they do not have to be so ugly and ill tempered with those who do not twist and massage the Word with them.
But, they are my brothers and sisters and I love them and continue to pray for them.

 

Thanks Amy!!!!!!!! I needed that verse elsewhere.....God is so good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Yes, not only did Christ die for those among the Jews but from among the Gentiles as well.

When the Lord propitiates sin -- He averts His own wrath justly falling on a particular person. Christ did not propitiate the sin of of every single person -- past,present and future. That is absurd -- otherwise no one would spend eternity in perdition. The Lord doesn't avert His own wrath from falling on a person and then send them to the Lake of Fire anyway.

If someone's sins are propitiated then they have no more sin therewith to be condemned.

 

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him.

I'm just an uneducated rednecks who believes that God was smart enough to say exactly what He meant exactly the way He wanted to say it!

IOW, IMHO, the highlighted portions of the above either mean what they say, or God is lying; or maybe just misleading?

If God does not mean what He says here, then maybe the Catholics had it right in the dark ages that the masses need someone of superior intellect and training to decipher for us iggurent folk who just take God at His word.

And if God doesn't mean what He says here, then perhaps there are some other places where He meant something other than what He said also--just maybe - ya think??? Maybe that big old thick curtain really didn't tear from top to bottom; maybe it was just a run in the fabric. Maybe Jesus isn't really coming back "--as you saw Him go", but will come back as a peasant farmer in Palestine -- who knows!?