For Whom Did Christ Die?

1 John 2:2 is a beautiful verse presenting the free offer of the gospel, which free offer all true Calvinists specifically affirm. But we can't press 1 John 2:2 into the service of universalism. If every sin of every man is efficiently propitiated, then there is no hell for us to shun.

Thus, the point of 1 John 2:2 can be grasped only when we realize that John is writing to Jews and warning them away from Hebrew exclusivism. In view of what I just said above, this has to be what John is saying.

***

If you need further support, I can give you more. But you will have to humbly allow the Scriptures themselves to interpret 1 John 2:2. (See below.) First of all, John is designated in Galatians 2:9 as an apostle to the Jews. So, my claim that John is warning the Jews about Hebrew exclusivism makes pretty obvious sense, I believe.

In the next place, the same apostle, writing in his Gospel, makes a wonderfully peculiar observation of a strange statement by Caiaphas the high priest. This statement struck John as containing a supernatural teaching point from a seemingly unlikely source! John would later remember Caiaphas's spiritually eerie statement and pen it, only slightly altered in wording, as 1 John 2:2!

So, to see what 1 John 2:2 actually means, look at John 11:51-52. The statement is almost identical to what John would later write in his First Epistle.

Read the two passages side-by-side, phrase-by-phrase, to see what I mean. These two passages are manifestly making the same point!

Now,since John 11:51-52 is obviously what moved John to write 1 John 2:2, we probably ought to use John 11:51-52 in the interpretation. And notice that John 11:51-52 says precisely what the Calvinist affirms concerning the Atonement!

The doctrine of the Atonement is a pretty strange doctrine. But the Spirit of Christ really is jealous to defend the correct statement of the doctrine. The death of christ is offerable to all who hear the offer--and this by divine design--but it also mysteriously designed to convert and sanctify the elect and the elect only.

***

Please think about this stuff. The Cross of Christ is powerful to save sinners. It converts elect souls. It breaks stubborn hearts in repentance and thereby bends their wills back to God for real for the first time since they fell in Adam!

When you get this vision of the Cross of Christ, evangelism becomes exciting. This is why Calvinists, not Arminians, have historically been the most agressive missionaries in the lousiest places in the world!

If you want some more stuff to chew on, I would urge you to read #73.

Re. 680.

I am glad that you feel that there is some level of agreement between us. However, you did not answer my earlier question: Are all men saved? If not, then we must conclude that "the world" and "all men" must mean something other than "all men, everywhere, at all times, without exception".

Even though the free offer of salvation is to be made to all (though imperfectly, since millions die without ever hearing the Gospel), the atonement is limited to those who are actually saved, those from "every nation, tribe, and tongue". As 'doc" stated, it is Calvinists who have historically taken the Great Commission seriously, and who have taken the Gospel to those who need to hear.

WHAT A JOKE, INDEED!

And it's on ctd!

(I gather that you did not even mean to set this as a trap for him!)

Aside to ctd: I think you are just cutting yourself to pieces on this forum.

1 John 2:2 1 John 2 1 John 2:1-3 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Very well. Let's take your supposition to it's logical end:

Please explain to me how the inhabitants of 7 contintents were following after Jesus:

John 12:19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, "You see that you are accomplishing nothing. Look, the world has gone after Him!"

BTW, are you a canibal?

John 6:53 Then Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.

From the_doc's post #72 or #73 on this same thread:

And what about post-Calvary folks in the jungles of New Guinea? What will happen to them in particular if they never even hear the gospel message of the New Testament? In other words, in what sense did Christ die to save them in particular if the Omnipotent Spirit of Almighty God is not pleased to GET the missionaries ALL THE WAY out in the middle of nowhere to present the message of the gospel to them in particular?
(How can the Third Person of the Trinity be said to be committed to the salvation of these folks in particular if He does not pull out all stops to get the gospel message to them in particular? And if the Second Person of the Trinity died to save them in particular, how come the Third Person of God is not always clearly and dynamically interested in saving them in particular? [Sometimes the Omnipotent Spirit deliberately leaves providential doors of opportunity closed!])
My point is that the Lord's atoning death can offer folks no saving good whatsoever if they never even get to hear the message. (This is precisely why Calvinists are such energetic jungle missionaries. We know that the unevangelized souls are doomed as having no atonement if we Christians can't even get to them with the New Testament message.)

You need to rethink your position!

No, I didn't set a trap. It was Woody's quote of his earlier question about being perfect that led me to remember all of our shared experiences related to Heb. 10:14. Out of politeness I pinged him, not in any attempt to trap him.

However, his insistence that he just had to know what I was referring to has been both comical and tragic at the same time, and very revealing concerning motivation.

If we are all predestined, what is the purpose of the great commission? Why would Jesus himself command us to "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost?" If we have already been chosen, there would be no need to go out and preach the gospel, it's all predestined. In Ezk. chapter 3 verse 17-21, it tells us that if we do not warn the wicked of God's judgement, their blood is on our hands. What blood? This would suggest that more could have been saved than actually were. Why would we need to warn anyone about anything if we are all predestined? My opinion on this subject is that we are chosen. But chosen does not mean predestined. Because we believed in Him, we have been chosen to enter into the kingdom. So in a sense, we have "earned" the right to enter into heaven, but not through deeds, instead through our faith in Him and obedience. When the bible says the Lord will tell His servent "Well done ye good and faithful servent," that would imply that we actually DID something. That "something" is obedience. (faith) The Lord IS omniscient. He knows who will actually enter into heaven, and always has. But what Ezk. 3 17-21 is trying to explain to us is that potentially, ALL of us can enter into the kingdom. That is the purpose of the great commission. So basically, the Lord does know which of us will enter into heaven, and always has, but that does not mean that MORE or ALL of us could not have entered, had we "chosen ones" been doing our jobs.

...comical and tragic...

Yes, I'm afraid that's the right way to say it.

Your 572 is indicative of the bad spirit that you have on this thread.

What bad spirit? That post was not even directed to me! I came across it by accident. So do not give me the line that it was meant for my edification.

My quote from Piper was a rebuttal to your earlier contention that Calvinists are somehow hung up on God's glory, and thus miss His love. It would be much less cryptic if you took time to read Desiring God.

Did you say that it was for? That is what I mean about being 'cryptic'.

As evidenced by your 572 (and many other posts) you deny us the charity of understanding our position.

Same old 'you do not understand us' line. What bugs you about me is that I do understand your positions

God's happiness is foremost in our minds, and supercedes our own happiness, something that you would easily recognize if you weren't determined to dismiss us out-of-hand. You continue to tear down the straw men of your own construction, and I get the impression that you refuse to grant us the basic Christian charity of considering that we (and our host of spiritual forefathers) are actually Bible believing Christians.

Gee, now you sound like Doc. How many times has any Calvinist ever used the words Love or Happiness? The words that you are hung up are Sovereignty and Glory. I bring up those other words to let you know that God is also a God of Love and Mercy, something that Calvinists ignore when they talk about unconditional election. As for the Bible Believeing Christians, I will grant that you are Christians, but your use of Scripture to fit into your TULIP shows that you do not believe the Bible you use it

If we are all predestined, what is the purpose of the great commission? Why would Jesus himself command us to "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost?" If we have already been chosen, there would be no need to go out and preach the gospel, it's all predestined. In Ezk. chapter 3 verse 17-21, it tells us that if we do not warn the wicked of God's judgement, their blood is on our hands. What blood? This would suggest that more could have been saved than actually were. Why would we need to warn anyone about anything if we are all predestined? My opinion on this subject is that we are chosen. But chosen does not mean predestined. Because we believed in Him, we have been chosen to enter into the kingdom. So in a sense, we have "earned" the right to enter into heaven, but not through deeds, instead through our faith in Him and obedience. When the bible says the Lord will tell His servent "Well done ye good and faithful servent," that would imply that we actually DID something. That "something" is obedience. (faith) The Lord IS omniscient. He knows who will actually enter into heaven, and always has. But what Ezk. 3 17-21 is trying to explain to us is that potentially, ALL of us can enter into the kingdom. That is the purpose of the great commission. So basically, the Lord does know which of us will enter into heaven, and always has, but that does not mean that MORE or ALL of us could not have entered, had we "chosen ones" been doing our jobs.

You say that you do not believe in Predestination. Just one question:

Matthew 11: 20 - 27 -- Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you." At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure." All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

God foreknew Tyre and Sidon's free choice NOT TO REPENT in the case of His non-performance of such Miracles; AND
God foreknew Tyre and Sidon's free choice TO REPENT in the case of His performance of such Miracles; AND
God CHOSE not to perform these Miracles in Tyre and Sidon, a choice which had as its perfectly foreknown result the NON-Repentance of Tyre and Sidon, just as He foreknew.
True, or False?

Woody's point in referring to John 12:19 ("world") is that the Greek-speaking writers of the New Testament did not use the universals of the Greek language (e.g., "all" and "world") in a rigidly, mathermatically inclusive way. They tended to use the universals in a way which grammars call "distributive."

So, you should regard 1 John 2:2 as a precious verse. It has great rhetorical power for presenting the freeness (distributive universality) of the Atonement. But the matter of who in particular Jesus' Atonement was designed to save is a different matter. It is, in fact, a deeper matter.

And when we look careful at the peculiar language conventions of the Greek text and the overall Biblical context (e.g., John 11:51-52) and the logical problems I identified in post #73, we discover that the Calvinistic position is correct.

"How many times has any Calvinist ever used the words Love or Happiness? The words that you are hung up are Sovereignty and Glory. I bring up those other words to let you know that God is also a God of Love and Mercy, something that Calvinists ignore when they talk about unconditional election."

You must read very selectively, due to the fact that God's love and God's mercy are paramount to us, as they have been to those of our persuasion down through the centuries. Woody demonstrated this much better than I can with some of his earlier posts. You might want to go back and read some of his statements on this thread. Additionally, you might want to consider the works of C.H. Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards, Thomas Watson, and John Piper, to name a few. The depth of the treatment of the subjects of God's love and God's mercy seen in the works of these men is unrivalled in all of Christendom.

We proclaim the wonder of God's mercy, recognizing that all of us deserve death and hell, yet by His love and His mercy He has chosen to save from among the totally undone mass of humanity.

Psssst... Hey, ftD.

There's a question which you still have not answered. Here it is again:

Matthew 11: 20 - 27 -- Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you." At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure." All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

God foreknew Tyre and Sidon's free choice NOT TO REPENT in the case of His non-performance of such Miracles; AND
God foreknew Tyre and Sidon's free choice TO REPENT in the case of His performance of such Miracles; AND
God CHOSE not to perform these Miracles in Tyre and Sidon, a choice which had as its perfectly foreknown result the NON-Repentance of Tyre and Sidon, just as He foreknew.
True, or False?

You know why you are not answering?

Because you know that what Jesus is teaching here is that God specifically pre-determines the individual choices of Men.

These are the specific words of Jesus.
And I accuse you of understanding His words, and hating them.

Prove me wrong. Answer the question.

Ummm! If a man has not had as you put it an "experience" then how can he say he is born again?

the experience should not be the guide for his life, but the scriptures. The experience after all came from hearing the words of God (faith cometh by hearing). A mystic is someone who makes Scripture fit his experiences, just like Eliphaz,Now a thing was secretly brought to me and mine ear received a little thereof. In thoughts from the visions of the night when deep sleep falleth on men (Job.4:12-13)

Oh, that's right, you think that decisions create character! Well, I say that experience (tribulation) produces character! I wonder which one of us the Bible will say is right!?!

Yes, experience does created character if one chooses to follow God in that tribulation. It is not automatic-is it? You do have to decide not to grieve(Eph.4) or quench(1Thes.5) the Holy Spirit-right? Or does God use His irresistable grace on you for that also?

I meant to include you on #690.

As a follow-up. If you were to take the time to read the sermon that started this thread, you would find that Spurgeon repeatedly speaks of the mighty love of God and His mercy towards sinners. So much for your contention that Calvinists never use these words, they are there for all to see.

No trick involved. There are some, like "connect" who answer in the negative. However, as I answered him, that is the only intellectually honest position that a non-predestinarian can take. That is why Clark Pinnock, and other noted Arminians, have adopted an "open theology" and refuse to ascribe complete foreknowledge to God. It is important to note that this is the logical result of a non-predestinarian position.

Well, since I said I do, what do you do now? Clark Pinnock is as heretical as TULIP Calvinists are!

Arminius believed in Omniscience but tied God's foreknowledge to where it was suppose to be, His knowledge, not His Omnipotence. You make Foreknowledge synonymous with Predestination which it is not. God knows who freely will believe before the Predestination Plan was set in motion.

The fact that those like Pinnock have gone that route shows what happens when you get bogged down with theological schools and reject the scriptures

BTW, happiness is way overrated. Joy is much to be preferred over happiness.

You present a very strong argument. I don't pretend to know everything. I'll have to think about that for a second. While I do, maybe you could clear up Ezk. 3 17:21. How could someone else's blood be on our hands if the Lord has already predestined and chosen who will enter into the kingdom? This goes back to my original point. Yes, the Lord does know who will accept Him and who will not, but this does not mean that MORE would not have accepted, if we believers did what Jesus commanded in Matthew. (the great commission) Bottom line is that ALL of our pea brains combined could not begin to phathom the complexities that make up our Lord. We should just trust in Him and let him guide us. (but then how could we trust in Him if we have no choice in the matter?)

In order to show us that you don't reject the Scriptures, why don't you answer OPie's Scripturally relevant question concerning Matthew 11:20-27 ?

I notice you haven't replied to my point about Paul. Let me ask you again: was Paul a predestinarian or not?