Did Christ die for all men?

[Bright Raven]

You failed to answer my question: is eternal life distinct from salvation? Yes or no? If so, then what would it mean for one to be saved and yet not receive eternal life?

Your question is ambiguous. If you have salvation, you have eternal life. You can not be saved and not have eternal life.

 

[csuguy]

Your question is ambiguous. If you have salvation, you have eternal life. You can not be saved and not have eternal life.

I agree. Which is why heir's attempt at dismissing what Paul says in Romans 2:6-11 doesn't work. Heir wants to say that there are rewards for good works, but distinguish this from the salvation we receive. Except here Paul is speaking of eternal life. If there is no such thing as salvation apart from eternal life, then there is no such thing as salvation apart from good deeds on our part.

 

[Lon]

There is but one Gospel.
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 is the Gospel.
Paul preached the Gospel to the unsaved.
Therefore Paul told unbelievers that 'Christ died for our sins'.

AMR alluded that Paul was only talking to believers at that point thus "our." It'd take a bit of exegesis, but I believe AMR was correct. We can discuss that further. One gospel? Yes. -Lon

 

[Sonnet]

AMR alluded that Paul was only talking to believers at that point thus "our." It'd take a bit of exegesis, but I believe AMR was correct. We can discuss that further. One gospel? Yes. -Lon

But that would mean two Gospels - one for believers and another for unbelievers.

 

[Lon]

But that would mean two Gospels - one for believers and another for unbelievers.

I think I understood why you said this to AMR but Paul is speaking 1Co 1:2 to the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus...

Can you explain a bit further why you think such necessitates two gospels? :idunno:
Thanks

 

[Sonnet]

If this is true, you'll have no problem showing us all where Peter EVER preached the gospel of Christ as the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth and that to Gentiles. Put up or shut up.

I still have no idea why you are making these kind of distinctions. Peter preached the Gospel that Paul preached - the same one. Paul concentrated on the Gentiles and Peter the Jews, but both shared the Gospel to whomever.

 

[Lon]

I still have no idea why you are making these kind of distinctions. Peter preached the Gospel that Paul preached - the same one. Paul concentrated on the Gentiles and Peter the Jews, but both shared the Gospel to whomever.

Mid Acts Dispensationalism (different than other dispensational positions).

 

[Sonnet]

I think I understood why you said this to AMR but Paul is speaking 1Co 1:2 to the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus...

Can you explain a bit further why you think such necessitates two gospels? :idunno:
Thanks

If one will not include the statement that, 'Christ died for our sins,' whilst sharing the good news to unbelievers, then, effectively, the Gospel becomes two Gospels. Though the alteration is slight in terms of wording, the actual effect is to eviscerate the very essence and power of it.

 

[Sonnet]

Mid Acts Dispensationalism (different than other dispensational positions).

Okay. I'm still not seeing the necessity of even attempting the distinctions made. You do accept that Peter preached the same Gospel as Paul don't you?

 

[Lon]

If one will not include the statement that, 'Christ died for our sins,' whilst sharing the good news to unbelievers, then, effectively, the Gospel becomes two Gospels. Though the alteration is slight in terms wording, the actual effect is to eviscerate the very essence and power of it.

Perhaps AMR nor I were clear. Let me try again:

Paul is speaking in 1Co 1:2" to the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus..."

It was a direct quote. Paul isn't 'presenting to unbelievers as far as I can tell. I've seen you say he is talking to gentiles somewhere in the book or passage? :idunno: I'm not seeing that at all. Realize also that you've a few talking to you about different things and so it could get confusing and become a bit of a befuddled mess. Mid Acts, for instance actually do believe there were 2 gospels, but not the two you mention here so it could get interesting trying to follow all these conversations and different points of view as far as systematic theologies go. I think you might have to up your learning curve game. -Lon

 

[Lon]

Okay. I'm still not seeing the necessity of even attempting the distinctions made. You do accept that Peter preached the same Gospel as Paul don't you?

Yes, but you will not find that agreement all over the forum here. Mid Acts people do believe there is only one gospel now, too. They however believe there were two gospels prior. The rest of Dispensationalists believe there was a kingdom offer, then a gospel when that didn't pan. Ask AMR about the Reformed view. I think I can explain it, but don't want to be misspoken (I haven't been a Calvinist long so am still learning).

 

[Sonnet]

Yes, but you will not find that agreement all over the forum here. Mid Acts people do believe there is only one gospel now, too. They however believe there were two gospels prior. The rest of Dispensationalists believe there was a kingdom offer, then a gospel when that didn't pan. Ask AMR about the Reformed view. I think I can explain it, but don't want to be misspoken (I haven't been a Calvinist long so am still learning).

The Gospel was announced to Abraham:

Galatians 3:7-9
Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.” So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

 

[Sonnet]

Perhaps AMR nor I were clear. Let me try again:

It was a direct quote. Paul isn't 'presenting to unbelievers as far as I can tell. I've seen you say he is talking to gentiles somewhere in the book or passage? :idunno: I'm not seeing that at all. Realize also that you've a few talking to you about different things and so it could get confusing and become a bit of a befuddled mess. Mid Acts, for instance actually do believe there were 2 gospels, but not the two you mention here so it could get interesting trying to follow all these conversations and different points of view as far as systematic theologies go. I think you might have to up your learning curve game. -Lon

I understand that Paul is talking to the Corinthian Church, but he allows for anyone who has 'believed in vain' (v.2).

 

[Lon]

The Gospel was announced to Abraham:

Galatians 3:7-9
Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.” So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

Covenant theology (which I am) sees the same. I think the good news is that all believe there is just one gospel today, whatever they disagree with prior.

I understand that Paul is talking to the Corinthian Church, but he allows for anyone who has 'believed in vain' (v.2).

Using your own quote: 'believed in vain' (v.2)

 

[Sonnet]

Covenant theology (which I am) sees the same. I think the good news is that all believe there is just one gospel today, whatever they disagree with prior.
Using your own quote: 'believed in vain' (v.2)

Just "Christ died for sinners." I don't believe He died for all sinners past, prior to His death burial, and resurrection. The good new is that Jesus Christ died to save sinners and then "all who call on the name of the Lord will be saved." Is it true to tell someone: "Christ died, specifically to 'save you!'" ? Even from your perspective, is that 100% true? I don't think it is necessary to say that. Simply "Christ died to save sinners like you and I," and "all who call on the name of the Lord will be saved."

1 Corinthians 15:11
Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach and this is what you believed.

The 'this' of v.11 refers to the Gospel Paul defines in vv.3-4, so the unsaved Corinthians believed this Gospel when Paul preached it to them ('which you received and on which you have taken your stand'), when he first came to them ('For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance'). It is also the Gospel that Paul and the Apostles preach (as at the time of the letter, though, of course, previous to and continuing into the future).

 

[Sonnet]

Using your own quote: 'believed in vain' (v.2)

v.2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

Saved by this Gospel, but not saved otherwise (if they do not hold firmly to it).

 

[Lon]

1 Corinthians 15:11
Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach and this is what you believed.

The 'this' of v.11 refers to the Gospel Paul defines in vv.3-4, so the unsaved Corinthians believed this Gospel when Paul preached it to them ('which you received and on which you have taken your stand'), when he first came to them ('For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance'). It is also the Gospel that Paul and the Apostles preach (as at the time of the letter, though, of course, previous to and continuing into the future).

Understood, it still doesn't change the gospel message given.

Simply "Christ died to save sinners like you and I," and "all who call on the name of the Lord will be saved."

v.2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

Saved by this Gospel, but not saved otherwise (if they do not hold firmly to it).

Romans 10:13 "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

So not 'all' who call on the name of the Lord?

Calvinism is not OSAS. It seems you are confusing us with them on this particular. We do believe all believers will persevere. God uses language to ensure we persevere. We do believe the saved are kept.

 

[Sonnet]

Understood, it still doesn't change the gospel message given.




Romans 10:13 "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

So not 'all' who call on the name of the Lord?

Calvinism is not OSAS. It seems you are confusing us with them on this particular. We do believe all believers will persevere. God uses language to ensure we persevere. We do believe the saved are kept.

But all this conflicts with the doctrine of limited atonement.

 

[Lon]

But all this conflicts with the doctrine of limited atonement.

Well, 1) I come to Limited Atonement from a different perspective than most Calvinists (I think). I simply recognize that the OT saints had faith in God to save them. Those who died without that faith, I believe died without the saving work of Jesus Christ and that because atonement means "at one" with God, that only those who are saved are atoned for. That part, I think is in keeping with Calvinism, and I embrace it. 2) I think it is even in keeping with other Calvinists, but can't really speak to that as one who is a bit different. You might have to ask another Calvinist or two...

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

But all this conflicts with the doctrine of limited atonement.

See:

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...RUST-IN-OSAS&p=4581989&viewfull=1#post4581989

AMR