Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
When it suits the anti-Calvinist, "all" means each and every person who ever lived. Would that they try imposing that more reasonably. See also John 12:32; 6:37; Luke 11:42; Acts 2:17; 10:12; Rom 14:2; 1 Cor 1:5; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 Tim 2:1-2, 4, 8; Matt 9:35. Cherry-picking Scripture to suit your purposes is not exegesis at all. :AMR1:
Proponents of general atonement cite general terms in three groups of texts to prove that God intended for Jesus to die for all humans without exception and that Jesus’ death is ineffective for some for whom He died.
(1) Texts containing the word “world”: John 3:16; 1 John 2:1-2; John 6:51; 2 Cor 5:19; John 1:9, 29; 3:17; 4:42; 1 John 4:14; John 12:46
(2) Texts containing the word “all”: 1 Tim 2:4-6; 2 Pet 3:9; Heb 2:9; 2 Cor 5:14-15; 1 Cor 15:22; Rom 5:18
(3) Texts allegedly depicting the perishing of those for whom Christ died: Rom 14:15; 1 Cor 8:11; 2 Pet 2:1; Heb 10:29
None of these texts substantiates general atonement. To the contrary, these texts uphold definite atonement without any contradiction. Proponents of general atonement cite John 3:16, for example, but a right understanding of God’s love, τὸν κόσμον, and πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων perfectly harmonizes with particular atonement; as David used Goliath’s own sword to sever Goliath’s head, so proponents of particular atonement may use John 3:16 to refute general atonement. The same is true of the other passages, such as ἱλασμός and ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου in 1 John 2:2, οἱ πάντες in 2 Cor 5:14-15, ὁ ἀδελφός in Rom 14:15 and 1 Cor 8:11, and τὸν ἀγοράσαντα αὐτοὺς δεσπότην ἀρνούμενοι in 2 Pet 2:1.
1Tim.2:4 is spoken immediately after vv1-3. V1 also refers to "all men," and then explains immediately, v2, what that phrase means: "kings and all who are in authority." v5 right afterward speaks of the "only Mediator between God and men."
The latter cannot be referring to ALL men without exception, but surely means that Jesus is the ONLY mediator there is. Those for whom he intercedes, he is effectual, Rom.8:34; Heb.7:25; Jn.17:9. Hence, the proper subject of that term (men) is the elect.
The former term, by means of the qualification, is properly understood as "all kinds of men," kings and authorities being a significant example. Therefore, in the following use of the same term, it is not only contextually proper, but theologically consistent to interpret v4 once again as "all kinds of men."
2Pet.3:9 tells exactly who Peter has in mind in the verse itself. "The Lord... is longsuffering toward us (some Gk texts say "you") not willing that any of [us or you] should perish, but that all [us or you] should come to repentance."
Again, we understand the apostle is speaking to the gathered church (which could contain half-hearted members), and refers even to those who have yet to join "us" but shall in due time. Them, the Lord is also concerned to save.
Ezk.18:32 & 33:11 say only that God is neither capricious in his judgments, nor delighted by the penalty justly received by those persons who refuse all his gracious inducements to turn from their self-ruining ways. Of course, it is still possible to speak of the fact that God is "pleased" to do justice where it is appropriate, and where mercy (on his terms) is refused. "Pleased" is being used in equivocal terms.
And—it should be noted—most Arminians and other universal-love proponents will consent to this reality when pressed. Virtually all evangelicals (those not flirting with universalism) agree with us that God will impose the final death sentence, being his last preference in regard to the obstinate. He is "pleased" to do so, and is not pleased to refrain, or grant further or indefinite stays.
When we want to discover what was meant by our Lord's sacrifice for the "whole world" or "all men", we need only look to the final book of Scripture, which explains what "all" and "world" mean as relates to salvation: And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation[/i], (Rev 5:9). Trying to force this clear teaching to read "each and every person" is just plain entrenchment in a view read into what Scripture is clearly not teaching.
Indeed, Christ’s life, death, and resurrection was not an attempt by God to make men savable, if they fulfilled certain conditions, even INCLUDING FAITH. It was His actual accomplishment of the justification of EVERY ELECT SINNER who Christ represented by His obedience unto death at Calvary.
Our Lord's High Priestly prayer in John 17 makes it clear that not "all" (each and every person) are the subject of His prayer. Jn.17:20-21, "I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me."
Without particular atonement Jesus prays for the salvation of some who will not be saved. This is even more problematic than the idea that the death of Christ was not only sufficient for the sins of the world, but also somehow efficient for all without exception either. Our Lord dies for some who won't be saved? How could divine efficiency and intention be divided?
Simply put: if some for whom Jesus prays for salvation yet aren't saved, how can we be assured that his prayers for us will deliver our souls from death? The matter is once more put into doubt. Either something more must yet be done for the saved by God; or else the responsibility falls to the individual soul to make Christ's prayers effectual, making God a debtor.
Our Lord either:
1. Made full atonement for sin once and for all
or
2. Something needs to be added to that sacrifice.
This may be thought of as the power of Christ's atonement.
IF, as some claim, Christ has died for all people then let's consider condition 1 above:
Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
That atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, all men are saved (effect)
The Scriptures teach:
Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
The atonement was made for the elect (population)
Therefore, the elect are saved (effect)
So now we turn to what the Arminian insists. He still wants to limit the effect of what happened because he realizes that all are not saved but what does he go after? The power of the atonement:
The atonement made salvation possible for men to be saved (power)
The atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, those who add some condition to the atonement will be saved (effect)
Essentially the great sin of this position is to deny what Christ actually accomplished. Arminians well know that if we are to take Hebrews 10:1-18 on its face then the only way to avoid universalism is that Christ died only for the elect. The only other option is to deny what Hebrews 10 teaches.
It is a recurring fact of historical theology that those who universalize the atonement make faith something more than a receiving and resting upon Christ alone for salvation.
AMR
Proponents of general atonement cite general terms in three groups of texts to prove that God intended for Jesus to die for all humans without exception and that Jesus’ death is ineffective for some for whom He died.
(1) Texts containing the word “world”: John 3:16; 1 John 2:1-2; John 6:51; 2 Cor 5:19; John 1:9, 29; 3:17; 4:42; 1 John 4:14; John 12:46
(2) Texts containing the word “all”: 1 Tim 2:4-6; 2 Pet 3:9; Heb 2:9; 2 Cor 5:14-15; 1 Cor 15:22; Rom 5:18
(3) Texts allegedly depicting the perishing of those for whom Christ died: Rom 14:15; 1 Cor 8:11; 2 Pet 2:1; Heb 10:29
None of these texts substantiates general atonement. To the contrary, these texts uphold definite atonement without any contradiction. Proponents of general atonement cite John 3:16, for example, but a right understanding of God’s love, τὸν κόσμον, and πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων perfectly harmonizes with particular atonement; as David used Goliath’s own sword to sever Goliath’s head, so proponents of particular atonement may use John 3:16 to refute general atonement. The same is true of the other passages, such as ἱλασμός and ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου in 1 John 2:2, οἱ πάντες in 2 Cor 5:14-15, ὁ ἀδελφός in Rom 14:15 and 1 Cor 8:11, and τὸν ἀγοράσαντα αὐτοὺς δεσπότην ἀρνούμενοι in 2 Pet 2:1.
1Tim.2:4 is spoken immediately after vv1-3. V1 also refers to "all men," and then explains immediately, v2, what that phrase means: "kings and all who are in authority." v5 right afterward speaks of the "only Mediator between God and men."
The latter cannot be referring to ALL men without exception, but surely means that Jesus is the ONLY mediator there is. Those for whom he intercedes, he is effectual, Rom.8:34; Heb.7:25; Jn.17:9. Hence, the proper subject of that term (men) is the elect.
The former term, by means of the qualification, is properly understood as "all kinds of men," kings and authorities being a significant example. Therefore, in the following use of the same term, it is not only contextually proper, but theologically consistent to interpret v4 once again as "all kinds of men."
2Pet.3:9 tells exactly who Peter has in mind in the verse itself. "The Lord... is longsuffering toward us (some Gk texts say "you") not willing that any of [us or you] should perish, but that all [us or you] should come to repentance."
Again, we understand the apostle is speaking to the gathered church (which could contain half-hearted members), and refers even to those who have yet to join "us" but shall in due time. Them, the Lord is also concerned to save.
Ezk.18:32 & 33:11 say only that God is neither capricious in his judgments, nor delighted by the penalty justly received by those persons who refuse all his gracious inducements to turn from their self-ruining ways. Of course, it is still possible to speak of the fact that God is "pleased" to do justice where it is appropriate, and where mercy (on his terms) is refused. "Pleased" is being used in equivocal terms.
And—it should be noted—most Arminians and other universal-love proponents will consent to this reality when pressed. Virtually all evangelicals (those not flirting with universalism) agree with us that God will impose the final death sentence, being his last preference in regard to the obstinate. He is "pleased" to do so, and is not pleased to refrain, or grant further or indefinite stays.
When we want to discover what was meant by our Lord's sacrifice for the "whole world" or "all men", we need only look to the final book of Scripture, which explains what "all" and "world" mean as relates to salvation: And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation[/i], (Rev 5:9). Trying to force this clear teaching to read "each and every person" is just plain entrenchment in a view read into what Scripture is clearly not teaching.
Indeed, Christ’s life, death, and resurrection was not an attempt by God to make men savable, if they fulfilled certain conditions, even INCLUDING FAITH. It was His actual accomplishment of the justification of EVERY ELECT SINNER who Christ represented by His obedience unto death at Calvary.
Our Lord's High Priestly prayer in John 17 makes it clear that not "all" (each and every person) are the subject of His prayer. Jn.17:20-21, "I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me."
Without particular atonement Jesus prays for the salvation of some who will not be saved. This is even more problematic than the idea that the death of Christ was not only sufficient for the sins of the world, but also somehow efficient for all without exception either. Our Lord dies for some who won't be saved? How could divine efficiency and intention be divided?
Simply put: if some for whom Jesus prays for salvation yet aren't saved, how can we be assured that his prayers for us will deliver our souls from death? The matter is once more put into doubt. Either something more must yet be done for the saved by God; or else the responsibility falls to the individual soul to make Christ's prayers effectual, making God a debtor.
Our Lord either:
1. Made full atonement for sin once and for all
or
2. Something needs to be added to that sacrifice.
This may be thought of as the power of Christ's atonement.
IF, as some claim, Christ has died for all people then let's consider condition 1 above:
Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
That atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, all men are saved (effect)
The Scriptures teach:
Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
The atonement was made for the elect (population)
Therefore, the elect are saved (effect)
So now we turn to what the Arminian insists. He still wants to limit the effect of what happened because he realizes that all are not saved but what does he go after? The power of the atonement:
The atonement made salvation possible for men to be saved (power)
The atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, those who add some condition to the atonement will be saved (effect)
Essentially the great sin of this position is to deny what Christ actually accomplished. Arminians well know that if we are to take Hebrews 10:1-18 on its face then the only way to avoid universalism is that Christ died only for the elect. The only other option is to deny what Hebrews 10 teaches.
It is a recurring fact of historical theology that those who universalize the atonement make faith something more than a receiving and resting upon Christ alone for salvation.
AMR