John Calvin - Jesus Died For the Whole Human Race

[Benoni]

Do you work in a blanket factory? How many folds do you do in an average days work? [emoji41]

Benoni, you're very cryptic in your words. How many people are in your compound?

No God's Word is very cryptic. The word mystery is used over 20 times in NT and means sacred secret. in the Greek. Its hidden to carnal believers. You need spiritual eyes not baptist eyes.

 

[MennoSota]

No God's Word is very cryptic. The word mystery is used over 20 times in NT and means sacred secret. in the Greek. Its hidden to carnal believers. You need spiritual eyes not baptist eyes.

Thanks oh guru with great enlightenment. I will light some incense in your great honor and only hope that some day I might sit in the dung of your spiritual greatness. [emoji41] [emoji90]

 

[Benoni]

Thanks oh guru with great enlightenment. I will light some incense in your great honor and only hope that some day I might sit in the dung of your spiritual greatness. [emoji41] [emoji90]

Mt Zion a rock of offense a stone of stumbling. I know this verse is too deep for your 30 fold limitations.

 

[MennoSota]

Mt Zion a rock of offense a stone of stumbling. I know this verse is too deep for your 30 fold limitations.

I am beginning to think you are utilyan. You make no sense.

 

[Benoni]

I am beginning to think you are utilyan. You make no sense.

Label me what ever you like you will never know anything above 30 fold.

 

[MennoSota]

Label me what ever you like you will never know anything above 30 fold.

Funny how you make yourself out to be a god who can tell others what they will be. The more you speak the more you sound like utilyan.

 

[Benoni]

Funny how you make yourself out to be a god who can tell others what they will be. The more you speak the more you sound like utilyan.

You really are a poor loser. I quote scripture and you ignore it, dismiss it and than attack me personally.

 

[Mr. Davis]

It is said by some that Calvin taught a "limited atonement." Was this really his teaching, or was it added later by others? The famous acrostic TULIP has it in it.

 

[TCassidy]

It is said by some that Calvin taught a "limited atonement." Was this really his teaching, or was it added later by others? The famous acrostic TULIP has it in it.

Yes, Calvin taught Limited Atonement. The problem is too many people don't understand what is meant by that term.

The atonement is not limited in its scope or sufficiency. It is only limited in its application. The atonement is only applied to believers. Thus the term "Sufficient for all, efficient only for believers."

The only other option is universalism. The teaching that all people, including unbelievers (and some even include the devil and his demons) will eventually be saved.

 

[utilyan]

Yes, Calvin taught Limited Atonement. The problem is too many people don't understand what is meant by that term.

The atonement is not limited in its scope or sufficiency. It is only limited in its application. The atonement is only applied to believers. Thus the term "Sufficient for all, efficient only for believers."

The only other option is universalism. The teaching that all people, including unbelievers (and some even include the devil and his demons) will eventually be saved.

Using same logic it can be said the ELECT have never and will never be saved having been chosen prior to creation and never at a threat to be saved from in the first place.

 

[Yeshua1]

So, is some of that sufficiency wasted then?

Not at all, as the Lord saves by it all that he intended to get saved!

 

[Yeshua1]

Marty seems to be a universalist. He promotes the idea that God will eventually save people while they are in hell. That's a universalist belief. According to a universalist, given enough time of suffering even Hitler will be welcome into heaven.
His cult like insistence on him being absolutely being correct or you are a reprobate is interesting given his penchant for universalism. He rejects others views, even respected theologians, pastors and scholars while demanding that only he is correct. That sounds like an intrabiblical cult.

That viewpoint would provide NO way to have God be in judgement now, would it? If all get saved, then why not go route of a Hitler. Manson, or a Hugh heffner and just do as your desire?

 

[reformed_baptist]

Not at all, as the Lord saves by it all that he intended to get saved!

Yet previously you stated that that his death is sufficient for all - however if all do not benefit from it how can that be, unless some of that sufficiency is wasted?

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes, Calvin taught Limited Atonement. The problem is too many people don't understand what is meant by that term.

The atonement is not limited in its scope or sufficiency. It is only limited in its application. The atonement is only applied to believers. Thus the term "Sufficient for all, efficient only for believers."

The only other option is universalism. The teaching that all people, including unbelievers (and some even include the devil and his demons) will eventually be saved.

So true, as IF the lord had intended the death of Christ to really provide a real salvation towards all, then all would have been saved!

 

[reformed_baptist]

I am saved because I love God. Do you need fear of hell to follow God? Well lets look at a few more translations.

Please enlarge upon the relevance of this response to the question I asked?

I ask if all will be saved (and if none will go to hell), i did not mention the necessity of a fear of hell when it comes to salvation.

Acts 15: 13-18 (Message) James broke the silence. "Friends, listen. Simeon has told us the story of how God at the very outset made sure that racial outsiders were included. This is in perfect agreement with the words of the prophets: After this, I'm coming back; I'll rebuild David's ruined house; I'll put all the pieces together again; I'll make it look like new So outsiders who seek will find, so they'll have a place to come to, All the pagan peoples included in what I'm doing. "God said it and now he's doing it. It's no afterthought; he's always known he would do this

Acts 15: (Amp) 17So that the rest of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles upon whom My name has been invoked,

Acts 15: (HCSB) 17 so that those who are left of mankind may seek the Lord— even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, says the Lord who does these things,

Acts 15: 17 (NIRV) Then the rest of the people can look to the Lord. This means all the non-Jews who belong to me. The Lord says this. He is the one who does these things.' —(Amos 9:11,12)

So, the best way to make a point is to go to paraphrased versions rather and juts quote a handful - what does this achieve?

I would prefer to deal with this:

Acts 15:17 ὅπως ἂν ἐκζητήσωσιν οἱ κατάλοιποι τῶν ἀνθρώπων τὸν κύριον καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ἐφ᾽ οὓς ἐπικέκληται τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς, λέγει κύριος ποιῶν ταῦτα (Act 15:17 BGT)

Care to translate or shall I?

Now if the rest of men may seek the Lord, All the pagan peoples included in what I'm doing “, “ all the Gentiles , the “remainder of man kind are destroyed as you proclaim in the Lake of Devine Purging (Lake of Fire); then what about this promise.

Acts 24:15
And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

Ah yes, I wonder if Paul was referring to Jesus' famous teaching on the resurrection:

John 5:28-29 "Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 "and come forth-- those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation. (Joh 5:28 NKJ)

Now, notice Jesus speak of the resurrection of the just snd the unjust as well - however he is very clear that these two groups go to very different destinations.

Resurrection means to rise; notice the word unjust in other words the non-elect/not believer.

I know what resurrection means. It is the conception of a living being returning to bodily life after death (it does not simply mean 'to rise'

We cannot have it both ways, my Jesus is not a monster; He is just.

No, you can't - you cant have a just Christ without also having a punishment for sin. If there is no hell then God is neither just or holy!

 

[MennoSota]

So true, as IF the lord had intended the death of Christ to really provide a real salvation towards all, then all would have been saved!

So, why do you and TC insist on Christ's death being for all, but yet limited only to some. It seems you add a middle man for no practical reason. Why not accept that Christ died for those whom the Father adopts and for no one else? For all others the full wrath of God falls on the individual because his sins never had atonement.
I'm trying to understand the value of the nuance you and TC are adding.

 

[TCassidy]

So, why do you and TC insist on Christ's death being for all,

2 Corinthians 5:15 He died for all.

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

Why not accept that Christ died for those whom the Father adopts and for no one else?

Because it isn't true. He died for all.

We do not deny that Christ died to save all in some sense. Paul says in 1 Timothy 4:10 that in Christ God is “the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.”

When Christ died on the cross He not only redeemed the elect, He also redeemed nature itself, which resulted in Matthew 5:45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. All of mankind profits from the death of Christ. But all of mankind will not be redeemed.

What we deny is that the death of Christ is for all men in the same sense. God sent Christ to save all in some sense. And he sent Christ to save those who believe in a more particular sense (Thus "Particular Redemption"). God’s intention is different for each. That is a natural way to read 1 Timothy 4:10.

For “all men” the death of Christ is the foundation of the free offer of the gospel. This is the meaning of John 3:16, “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

The sending of the Son is for the whole world in the sense that Jesus makes plain: so that whoever believes in him should not perish. In that sense God sent Jesus for everyone. Or, to use the words of 1 Timothy 4:10, God is the “Savior of all people” in that Christ died to provide an absolutely reliable and valid offer of forgiveness to all, such that everyone, without exception, who trusts Christ would be saved.

When the gospel is preached, Christ is offered to all without discrimination. And the offer is absolutely authentic for all. What is offered is Christ, and anyone — absolutely anyone — who receives Christ receives all that he bought for his sheep, his bride. The gospel does not offer a possibility of salvation. It is the possibility of salvation. But what is offered is Christ, and in him the infinite achievement that he accomplished for his people by his death and resurrection.

 

[Yeshua1]

So, why do you and TC insist on Christ's death being for all, but yet limited only to some. It seems you add a middle man for no practical reason. Why not accept that Christ died for those whom the Father adopts and for no one else? For all others the full wrath of God falls on the individual because his sins never had atonement.
I'm trying to understand the value of the nuance you and TC are adding.

Jesus died for all persons, but the father just applies his death in a salvation sense towards the Elect in Christ. The main reason that I see it in that light is that I take the died for all, for sins of entire world as meaning just that, and not make it mean just for the elect!

 

[utilyan]

Let me help clear things up.


Everyone in heaven and who will be in heaven is Elect.

 

[MennoSota]

Jesus died for all persons, but the father just applies his death in a salvation sense towards the Elect in Christ. The main reason that I see it in that light is that I take the died for all, for sins of entire world as meaning just that, and not make it mean just for the elect!

"First John 2:2 has perplexed many a Calvinist because the idea that Jesus is the propitiation for “the sins of the whole world” apparently teaches the Savior has made atonement for everyone without exception. However, this verse is not troublesome once we understand John is not explaining the intent of the atonement but is only repeating some basic Christian truths. Remember that in the early church, many Jews found it hard to believe that God would save the Gentiles. This verse addresses this problem, reminding us that the one who saves the Jews is the same one who saves the Gentiles. Jesus is the propitiation for both Jew and Gentile. The passage says nothing in favor of Him dying for every individual on earth.
So 1 John 2:2 merely tells us there is only one way of salvation. If anyone will be redeemed, he will be redeemed through Jesus, the only Savior."
Ligonier Ministries