Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

[Magenta]

Romans 9:19-21 One of you will say to me, “Then why does God still find fault? For who can resist His will?” But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to Him who formed it, “Why did You make me like this?” Does not the potter have the right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special occasions and another for common use?

 

[Rufus]

You still haven't answered my five questions. Now you are insisting I should answer six questions you asked someone else, while you hide from answering my questions. You are captured by an ideology that has no answers to basic biblical questions, but produces myriads of paragraphs focussed only on rationalising the ideology.


PaulThomson said:
What was the consequence of Adam's sin?
How many people who have died will be raised from the dead?
So, how many people did Jesus save from the first death?
How many will He save also from the second death?
Why does this not make Him the Saviour (from death) of all men, but especially of those who believe?

My questions are relevant to the passage under discussion. Yours are not.

No matter how you slice it and dice it, Jesus does not save all men from the penalty and power of sin in the distributive sense; therefore, he is not the Savior of all men in the distributive sense either. You can try all the mental gymnastics at your disposal but you're not going to change this fact.

 

[PaulThomson]

My questions are relevant to the passage under discussion. Yours are not.

No matter how you slice it and dice it, Jesus does not save all men from the penalty and power of sin in the distributive sense; therefore, he is not the Savior of all men in the distributive sense either. You can try all the mental gymnastics at your disposal but you're not going to change this fact.

Well, everyone dies physically because of Adam's sin, and Jesus raises all the physically dead; so He must have paid the death penalty for all to buy all back from death's grip in order to stand them up bodily before Him for judgment. So, there is that way to slice it and dice it.

 

[Rufus]

Well, everyone dies physically because of Adam's sin, and Jesus raises all the physically dead; so He must have paid the death penalty for all to buy all back from death's grip in order to stand them up bodily before Him for judgment. So, there is that way to slice it and dice it.

But he didn't pay the death penalty of the wicked. The resurrection does not prove that he did. The reason for the resurrection of the just and unjust is that both groups will exist throughout eternity as human beings which, of course, requires them to have physical bodies.

 

[Rufus]

And one other thing about physical death. Everyone dies physically so that sin will not be perpetuated forever. The great paradox with God's saints is that physical death finally releases them from their flesh (sin nature) and makes them free to love and serve God perfectly in heaven and eventually here on earth. Physical death for a saint is the quintessential act of perfectly dying to himself.

 

[Rufus]

Dan 12:1-2
12:1 "At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people — everyone whose name is found written in the book — will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt
NIV

So....if God is the Savior of all men in the distributive sense, then he is the Savior of all to whom he raises to everlasting life, and he is the Savior of those whom he raises to shame and everlasting contempt. Interesting Savior... He forgot to save the wicked from his everlasting contempt, did he?

 

[Rufus]

Dan 12:1-2
12:1 "At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people — everyone whose name is found written in the book — will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt
NIV

So....if God is the Savior of all men in the distributive sense, then he is the Savior of all to whom he raises to everlasting life, and he is the Savior of those whom he raises to shame and everlasting contempt. Interesting Savior... He forgot to save the wicked from his everlasting contempt, did he?

 

[Rufus]

Got a little quiet in here, so it's a good time to present another argument against unlimitefd atonement. I will argue from the "MANY" -- but this time from the "many nations".

"All" is often used in scripture in the limited sense to denote "many". But "many" is never used to denote "all". And this becomes no small problem for those who believe in unlimited atonement because if God's redemptive promises or prophecies pertain to only many nations, then logically there's no way to extract from many nations an a atonement for each and every person on the planet.

First, we have the Abrahamic Covenant itself in which God promised Abraham to make him the [spiritual] father of "many" nations (Gen 17:4-5).

Then we have a messianic prophecy in Isa 52:15 in which the resurrected, exalted Christ will "sprinkle many nations".

Then we have an end times prophecy that states that "many nations" will be joined to the Lord and they will become his people (Zech 2:11).

Since God clearly never intended to save each and every nation in the world, let alone each and every person in it, then why in the world would God send his Son to die for each and every person?

 

[PaulThomson]

But he didn't pay the death penalty of the wicked. The resurrection does not prove that he did. The reason for the resurrection of the just and unjust is that both groups will exist throughout eternity as human beings which, of course, requires them to have physical bodies.

If Christ did not need to die for the wicked in order to resurrect them out of death, then He did not need to die for the saints to resurrect them out of death. If Christ needed to die for the saints in order to raise them out of death for glory, then He also needed to die for the wicked to raise them out of death for judgment.

 

[Rufus]

If Christ did not need to die for the wicked in order to resurrect them out of death, then He did not need to die for the saints to resurrect them out of death. If Christ needed to die for the saints in order to raise them out of death for glory, then He also needed to die for the wicked to raise them out of death for judgment.

He needed to die for elect so that they could be forgiven, justified by having Christ's righteousness imputed to them, freed from the power of sin and eventually from the presence of it. And in order for all this to happen, Christ raised the elect dead spiritually so that they could positively respond to gospel, since dead men kinda have a tough time doing that. The wicked don't experience any of this.