Salvation is for All

[InTruth]

All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all (Is. 53.6) [Surely the "all" who went astray are the same "all" (i.e., all Israel and all mankind) whose iniquity was laid upon Christ.]

Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world (John 1.29) [Just as the Old Testament sacrifices were offered for all Israel and not for a select group of Israelites, so the fulfillment thereof in Christ's sacrifice as the Lamb of God was offered for the whole world of mankind and not for a limited "elect."]

And as Moses lifted upon the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish.... [F]or God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned.... He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the on Son shall not see life.... (John 3.14-18,36) [Healing vial the upraised serpent brass, which Christ said pictured His being lifted up on the Cross, was for all who would look to faith. It's hard not to make the world mean everyone in the world and whosoever believeth anyone in the world whosoever is willing.]

Remember ye the law of Moses...which I commanded...for all Israel.... (Mal. 4.4) [The law, with its accompanying sacrifices, was for all Israel-and the fulfillment in Christ is for all mankind.]

If any many thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.... (John 7.37)

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. (Rom. 1.16)

Christ died for the ungodly. (Rom. 5.6) [All are ungodly, not only the elect.]

But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith...might be given to them that believe. (Gal. 3.22)

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Rom. 6.23)

Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. (1 Tim. 1.15) (Surely the elect are not the only sinners.]

Who will have all men be saved, and to come to the knowledge of truth. (1 Tim. 2.4)

Who gave himself a ransom for all.... (1 Tim 2.6)

We trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, specially those that believe. (1 Tim. 4.10)

That he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. (Heb. 2.9)

The Lord is...not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. (2 Pet. 3.9)

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.... And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only; but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John 1.9-2.2)

The Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world. (1 John 4.14)

To take these many (and the many other similar) clear declarations that salvation is for all, for the world, for whosoever, for all Israel, for any man, for every one that believeth, etc., and dare to say that only an elect group is in mind is to deliberately change God's Word!

Do only the elect go astray like lost sheep? Do only the elect thirst? Are only the elect ungodly and sinners? Are only the elect "under sin"?

These verses, and many more like them, clearly state in unambiguous language that Christ was sent to be "the Savior of the world," that His death was a "ransom for all" and that He is therefore "the Savior of all men" who will but believe.

[InTruth]

AN UNWARRANTED ASSUMPTION

John Owen attempts to counter such scriptures about unlimited atonement with the following commentary upon 1 Tim. 1.15, "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners":

Now, if you will ask who these sinners are towards who he hath this gracious intent and purpose, himself tells you, Matthew 20.28, that he came to "give his life a ransom for many;" in other places called us believers distinguished from the world: for he "gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world..." Gal. 1.4... Eph. 5.25-27, "He loved the church, and gave himself for it..." Tit. 2.14, "He gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity..." for through him "we have access into the grace wherein we stand," Rom. 5.2, etc.
In response to Owen, we can say obviously the multitude of verses that state clearly that God loves all and is merciful to all and that Christ died for all are not nullified by other verses declaring that Christ died for the church, that His death was a ransom for many, or the assurance that He died for us, etc. These verses do not say Christ died only for many sinners, only for the church, only for us, etc. By that interpretation, statements such as, "For if through the offense of one [Adam] many be dead...by one's man's disobedience many were made sinners" (Rom. 5.15,19), etc., would indicate that only a limited number were made sinners and died through Adam's disobedience.

Of course, the apostles, writing to believers, would remind them that Christ died for them-but that statement cannot void the many clear declarations that He died for all. Yet this same argument is offered repeatedly by Calvinists to this day. Piper quotes the same inapplicable verses which it is said that Christ was a "ransom for many," that He "bare the sin of many," and He "loved the church and and gave himself for her," etc. as a "proof" that Christ's death was not propitiatory for all.

By such reasoning, Paul wouldn't have been able to use "you," "ye," etc. in writing to the Corinthians because that would mean the benefits of Christ's death and resurrection were only for them. By the same argument, for David to say, "The LORD is my shepherd..." (Ps. 23.1) would mean that this was true only for God. Or when Israel's prophet wrote, "O God of Israel, the Saviour...their redeemer is strong, the LORD of hosts is his name..." (Is. 45.15; Jer. 50.34), it meant that God was the God and redeemer of only Israel.

Equally absurd, for Paul to say "the Son of God who loved me" (Gal. 2.20) would mean that Christ loved only Paul.

[InTruth]

SENSE OR NONSENSE?

Consider the following attempt by John Piper and his pastoral staff to explain away 1 Tim. 4.10:

Christ's death so clearly demonstrates God's just abhorrence of sin that he is free to treat the world with mercy without compromising his righteousness. In this sense Christ is the savior of all men. But he is especially the Savior of those who believe. He did not die for all men in the same sense... The death of Christ actually saves from all evil those for whom Christ died "especially." [Emphasis in the original]

Can anyone make sense of "Christ did not die for all men in the same sense," yet He is the savior of all men "in this sense"? What is this sense? Because Christ's death "demonstrates God's just abhorrence of sin..." He is able to "treat the world with mercy without compromising his righteousness." But He doesn't treat all with mercy, be cause Christ "did not die for all men in the same sense..." Neither this sense or same sense are defined, so we can't make any sense out of this nonsense. But it shows again the lengths to which one must go to defend Calvinism.

One is reminded of Spurgeon's objection (because it so clearly contradicts the Calvinism he otherwise affirmed) to such attempts to get around the clear words of Scripture. In commenting upon 1 Tim 2.4 (contradicting his own defense of Limited Atonement at other times), he said:

I was reading just now the exposition of [one] who explains the text so as to explain it away [as] if it read "Who will not have all men to be saved..." the passage should run thus-"whose wish it is that all men should be saved...." As it is my wish...as it is your wish...so it is God's wish that all men should be saved; for, assuredly, he is not less benevolent than we are.

Yet Spurgeon contradicted himself again in saying that God is able to save all He desires to save. Since all are not saved, God's wish that all men should be saved cannot be sincere. Consequently, He [I]is less benevolent than Spurgeon, who desires all men to be saved-and surely less benevolent than Paul, who was willing to be "accursed from Christ" if that would save his brethren the Jews (Rom. 9.1-5). How could God desire all men to be saved, be able to save all He desires to save, yet all are not saved?

John MacArthur, Jr. (like Spurgeon) tries to escape the obvious contradiction by saying that God has a "will of decree" and a "will of desire." In the process of escaping one contradiction, he falls into another. How could God, given Calvinism's extreme view of sovereignty, fail to decree anything He truly desires? Calvinists boast that they exegete Scripture. But where in 1 Tim. 2.4 (or anywhere else) is there even a hint of "two wills," one of "decree" and one of "desire" as Piper and others also teach?

It is the imposition upon Scripture of an unbiblical theory that entraps the Calvinist in such contradictions. Obviously, the contradiction would disappear if (a) free will were admitted, or (b) God was not the author of sin, or (c) God does not arbitrarily select some for salvation, while preventing others opportunity to be saved. But neither of these three options can be allowed, because they would destroy TULIP.

Boettner declares that "Calvinists hold that the intention and secret plan of God, Christ died for the elect only..." Otherwise, adds Boettner, "If Christ's death was intended to save all men, then we must say that God was either unable or unwilling to carry out His plans." He forgets that Christ's death only benefits those who receive Christ (John 1.12) and that salvation, being "the gift of God" (Rom. 6.23), must be willingly received. As for men being able to oppose God's plans, is the evil in the world God's plan? Why, then, are we to pray, "Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven"?

Remember Isaiah is speaking to all of Israel when he says, "all we like sheep have gone astray..." and when he declares that "the iniquity of us all" would be laid upon the coming Messiah. As surely as all went astray, so surely did God lay upon Christ the iniquity of us all-yet many Israelites throughout history have not been saved. These and many other scriptures make it clear that the benefit of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection in fully payment for the sins of the world is available to be received by whosoever believes the gospel, while the wrath of God abides upon all who reject Christ and the salvation genuinely offered to all in Him.

[InTruth]

THE CONCLUSION

The "New Calvinists" say free will is true in addition to total depravity. How can this be? They say it was everyone's free will to sin. My response is it really our fault since we were born into sin? That fault belongs to Adam alone. But it is certainly our fault if we refuse the solution by the salvation of the cross. And, that the god of calvinism chooses some for salvation and does not give others the opportunity to be saved in no way infringes on free will they say, because it is wrapped up in the mystery of God's divine will why He does not give some the opportunity while imposing on others grace without first consideration of their free will for the free-choice to accept the cross. My question is, do you think calvinists are showing their fruit that, in fact, they have never been regenerated in Christ by the Holy Spirit? If God were to ask me, I would say most calvinists are not saved; though there is alway the exception to the rule for the calvinists than are wishy washy and are not yet entrenched in their beliefs.