[rdb3]

Amen. Christ did not die for each and every man, but His elect in whom He foreknew from the foundation of the world. Man's nature is to flee from and reject Christ. They find nothing desirable in Him. But by His election and though His Holy Spirit, those of us who have been quickened know that He is altogether lovely.

This subject is not milk, but meat, and is hard to digest. Nevertheless, it is the gospel truth.

Thanks for the Spurgeon bump.

[Sueann]

"Christ did not die for each and every man"

Hmmmm? "It is GOD's desire that NONE should perish".

How do you reconcile the two statements?

[sheltonmac]

"Christ did not die for each and every man, but His elect in whom He foreknew from the foundation of the world."

"Sufficienter pro omnibus, efficaciter tantum pro electis." ("Sufficiently for all, efficaciously only for the elect.")

Christ did not die to offer redemption but to purchase redemption for the elect.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Christ did die for each and every man.

[fortheDeclaration]

Amen. Christ did not die for each and every man

And 1Jn.2:2, 1Tim.2:4,4:10 and Heb.2:9 mean what?

Even so, come Lord Jesus

[Urbane_Guerilla]

Amen. Christ did not die for each and every man, but His elect in whom He foreknew from the foundation of the world.

Utter, utter nonsense, and dangerous, evil nonsense also. Whatever anything else anyone believes about Jesus, the fundamental fact of Jesus is that he died for every human who has ever existed. I am not even a Christian and I know this to be true. Your arrogant nonsense is the reason why so many people justifiably hate certain Christians. Why not just put a lime green daub of paint on the end of your nose, and call it predestined.

[azhenfud]

"Christ did not die for each and every man, but His elect in whom He foreknew from the foundation of the world."

Please answer this: by believing such a theory, do you not then fall guilty of the same error that the pious religious leaders of Jesus' day were guilty of teaching their fellows?
Look at what John told the Jews while he baptized the believers. Paraphrazed, he said that just because you are the blood of Abraham, you think you are the only ones who are worthy to be called "sons of God" and obtain mercy from Him, however God would raise up sons unto Himself from the very stones of the earth and He would have mercy on whom He would have mercy (not according to your or my reasoning - thank God). In Jesus' and John's day, stones were considered a problem to reaching a destination because stones in pathways wreaked havoc on the feet due to the lack of substantial footwear. Likewise, the Gentiles were seen as a hinderance to the devout Jews, who only saw them as being "in the way" of Israel reaching her "goals", however earthly they were. They were just not in the frame of mind to include their "outcast" within their plans. Both Jesus and John heaped insults upon the so called "heritage" of the Jews by stating that the stones' would be more worthy to be called "sons of God" than those born by bloodline of Abraham. Jesus reminded them of John's comments when He stated that if men were restrained from praise, even the stones would cry out.
We should be VERY careful of such a like attitude of the Jews unless we kindle God's anger against us, and we find ourselves being the shortsighted. This attitude seems to have become our self-justification to sit on our duffs and reject God's command to tell the salvation story to all....
Az

[iconoclast]

Christ did not die for each and every man, but His elect in whom He foreknew from the foundation of the world.

My goodness, you Calvinists are so far out that it is only by your fellow Christian's graciousness (and prayers that you may see the light) that you are accepted in the family of believers.

[CPI News]

AMEN

-Daniel