"And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world."
1 John 4:14.
It has been argued that Jesus could not technically be the 'Savior of the world', because not everyone in the world will be saved. Thus, the doctrine has been spawned that would have us believe that the words ‘Savior’ and/or 'world' must not really mean Savior in the sense of 'Savior of all mankind' or that the word 'world' must mean the 'elect', or only those who've been chosen for salvation.
These who struggle with Christ’s “Savior of the world” title as contradictory seem to have no problem with the Bible’s other beautiful paradoxes like: to be first – you must be last; to find life – you must lose it; to live – you must die; to be the greatest – you must become the least. So what’s difficult about the fact that Jesus is indeed the Savior of the entire world? More on that later.
Is this really as problematic as it may seem?
Obviously, Jesus being the Savior of the world isn’t the same thing as saying that everyone will be saved. That is clearly pointed out in scripture.
The Bible also calls Jesus the “Bread of Life”, the “Only Way”, the “Door” of salvation – so do these titles become untrue of Christ because not everyone will eat of the ‘Bread of Life’, follow the ‘Only Way’, or go through the “Door”? Of course not.
Jesus, indeed, is all of these things – and is the Savior of the world.
So how can He be called Savior of the World if not everyone will be saved in the world?
Because Jesus is the Savior – not A savior, not the savior of some, not just my Savior, but the Savior – the Savior of the world. It’s because of the fact that He is more than enough, more than able, more than capable of saving every single human being on this planet – that makes Him Savior of the world. There is no other Savior – we can’t save ourselves. There is no other way other than Jesus Christ.
Which is precisely why the apostle said:
"There is salvation in none other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12.
I was eating breakfast with my son this morning at our favorite little ‘greasy spoon’ restaurant, and on the wall in front of us was a little sign that said: “You had a choice – And you chose us. Thank you!” That’s God’s offer to us. God in His infinite love has given mankind a choice – we can either reject or accept this beautiful offer. It’s open to anyone who will repent of his or her sin and put his or her trust in Him.
Christ is the Savior of the world – just because some won’t take the offer doesn’t diminish His power or what or Who He is in any way. It just speaks of the fact that God enabled us to choose – which goes back to the Garden of Eden – whether we will accept or embrace Him.
The real reason some find it difficult to accept Christ’s unlimited atonement is that it leads to man’s free choice – which means that God’s grace can be rejected or resisted. That means a theological system known as TULIP begins to crumble. I've discovered in my studies that a tulip is a beautiful flower, but it's not a very good representation of the God of the Bible.
And this is precisely why this hill is worth dying on for those with this system. To admit that Christ’s atonement is unlimited is to then concede that man must have free choice which means grace can be resisted. That would mean a theological system may be flawed – and that, to them, is unthinkable.
I feel we've begun to talk (type) right past one another.
ReplyDeleteThe reason - is that there were/are probably unsatisfactory answers given on both sides ;^)
ReplyDeletePerhaps. Or it may just be that, what we have here is...
ReplyDeleteAs someone pointed out earlier, discussions such as these are much better suited in person. Why don't you give Cedarville U. a call, and let them know that we are available? ;^)
ReplyDeleteHa! I'm fairly "certain" they wouldn't be interested.
ReplyDeleteI've got a better idea. So far this discussion has had all the structure of a barnyard brawl. What say we focus on one issue, your choice, and impose a bit of order upon our wrangling. Choose something you believe that you think I deny, or something you think I believe, that you deny. Then we can decide who's affirmative and who's negative.
Affirmative can go first, negative can question, negative go second, then affirmative question. Then one rebuttal each. You game?
By the way, Christ being the Savior of the world isn't something that I, or any Calvinst I've ever heard of, denies. I raised the issue merely to point out that saying Christ did something for the world doesn't by itself prove he did it to every single person in the world, a point you seconded when you acknowledged that not every single person in the world is saved.
sure thing bro!
ReplyDeleteI will say, however, that in your own comments, you've stated that 2 Peter 3:9 can't mean the whole world, and appeared to be questioning whether 1 John 4:14 meant the entire world or not.
I have seen that stance taken by others in my reading - thus, my deductions.
Let's start (or stay) with 2 Peter 3:9 - is Peter speaking about the whole world or just the elect?
I'm not sure that our disagreement on that particular point is acute enough to sustain a profitable debate. For one, I don't remember saying that the verse "can't" mean the whole world, just that context seems to indicate otherwise.
ReplyDeleteI am in fact willing to concede that God is not willing that "any single person" should perish and even that he desires "every single person" to come to repentance. After all, that's what Calvin said, and you know he's the final word on all my theology. 8-)
Well, since the visiting team always bats first - why don't you select your best 'hitter' and send him to the plate first then ;^)
ReplyDeleteVery well, I propose this for starters (I'm sure we'll have to do some haggling before we come to a precise point of disagreement)
ReplyDeleteResolved: That God chooses who will be saved.
Sounds good. How about you begin then - make your case as to why you believe that is true...
ReplyDeleteI believe that God chooses who will be saved because the Scriptures tell us that:
ReplyDeleteThe Father is known only by those to whom Christ has chosen to reveal him (Matt 11:27).
God calls many, but chooses only few, and those not chosen are cast out into darkness (Matt22:14).
In the end, no human being would be saved unless God had chosen his elect to be saved (Mark 13:20).
Those who are not of the world are not of the world because Christ chooses them out of the world (John 15:16).
The remnant of saved Jews in Paul’s day was saved because God had chosen them by grace (Rom 11:15).
Those who receive spiritual blessings in Christ receive those blessings because they were chosen in him before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4).
Those who are in Christ are in him because they are God’s chosen ones (Col 3:12).
Those who receive the gospel in word, power, the Holy Spirit, and full conviction have proven that God has chosen them (I Thess. 1:4).
The Thessalonians were firstfruits to be saved because God had chosen them to be so (II Thess 2:13).
Those who are rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom are chosen by God to be so (James 2:5)
Now your questions. Propose some sort of number limit and I'll abide by it too. I'll also try to stick just to answering your questions and not make more arguments of my own until it's my turn again.
And I hate to break up the flow, but forgive me if I'm not able to answer them all in a timely manner.
Dude, Message Remix startled me out of my seat.
ReplyDeleteSorry about that! I was experimenting with them - I've got them set now so the reader has to turn them on, as I typically don't care for automatic play things on websites.
ReplyDeleteI'll get a response on your post as soon as I can - I'm not sure we're that far apart on this actually - but there's enough diff to discuss.
Blessings,
E
OK - I'll ask and limit myself to five questions:
ReplyDelete1. If being chosen or elected to salvation requires no intelligent or moral choice or choosing on man's part, why does Paul say in the rest of the 2 Thess. 2:13 verse that your salvation came through..."belief in the truth"?
2. How is it possible to sure of one's election that Peter tells us to be 'sure of' in 1 Peter 1:10, if there is no intelligent or moral choice on man's part?
3. Scripture is clear that being "chosen" by God does not necessarily bring salvation. (Deut. 7:6; John 6:70-71; 1 Tim. 2:4,6; 1 Tim. 4:10)So if being chosen by God automatically means salvation - why are not all those chosen saved then?
4. How is it possible for God to "foreknow" what He has purposed to do since His purposes have always existed?
5. Can you supply me with one verse in the entire Bible that shows election or predestination is referring specifically to salvation?
1 & 2) Being elected to salvation absolutely does involve an intelligent and moral choice on man's part.
ReplyDelete3)Certainly, being chosen to be God's covenant people (Deut 7:6) or being chosen to be one of the twelve disciples (John 6:70-71) doesn't automatically mean salvation; salvation is only guaranteed when one is chosen for salvation.
4)When the Scriptures speak of God's foreknowledge, they are speaking relative to human knowledge. To be sure, God doesn't know something before he knows it, but he does know everything before man knows it, and that's what foreknowledge means.
5)I find this question a bit puzzling. If you're looking for specific verses where the word "salvation" is used in connection with God's choice, you can look again at Mark 13:30 and especially at 2 Thess. 2:13.
If, perhaps, you believe that knowing the Father, not being cast into darkness, receiving spiritual blessings in Christ, believing the gospel, being rich in faith, and being heirs of the kingdom are something other than salvation, then you have a definition of salvation with which I'm unfamiliar.
If, perhaps, you're making a distinction between being elected and being chosen, then you're making a distinction with which I am unfamiliar.
Would you like a few follow-ups? Or would you like to proceed to your negative?
Perhaps a couple of follow-ups?
ReplyDeleteSounds good.
ReplyDeleteOK...
ReplyDeleteSo you are saying that while even though we are chosen to be saved by God, that we do have the choice as to whether receive salvation or not then?
You mentioned Mark 13:30 - are you sure you meant this verse? I didn't see how it was germane to our discussion?
I undertand the God's "choosing" verses, but I was looking specifically for a verse in the Bible that used the 'predestined' term where it meant salvation?
On your reply to question three - Deut. 7:6 - are saying that people can be chosen by God to be His people - but then go to hell, theoretically?
And then, even though the New Testament describes believers as "disciples" over "Christians" at a rate of about 275 to 3, are you saying that a disciple is different than a Christian?
If different - How can Jesus choose someone as a disciple and it not 'work out', and His choice for salvation be any less resistable? Isn't this about not being able to resist God's choice?
Yes, everyone (well, everyone who hears the gospel) has the choice as to whether to receive salvation. And those who have been chosen by God will freely choose to receive it.
ReplyDeleteSorry, I meant Mark 13:20
The word "predestined"? Again, I don't know of any verses that use the precise phrase "predestined to salvation." But Romans 8:29 says we were predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ; Romans 8:30 speaks of our being predestined to be called, justified, and glorified; and Eph. 1:4 speaks of our being predestined to adoption as sons. Perhaps you're able to think of a way to separate these things from "salvation." I am not.
I am saying that people can be chosen to be God's people and go to hell, yes.
I don't think I would say that a disciple is different from a Christian. I do know that not all who were called disciples were saved, and by implication I would think that not all those the Scripture calls Christians were necessarily saved.
It's not about not being able to resist God's choice; it's about not wanting to resist God's choice. God's choice brings with it everything necessary for salvation; that includes giving the person the will to be saved.
One last clarification follow-up?
ReplyDeleteAre you saying that God chooses us to be saved - but we are not 'predestined' to be saved?
No, I believe that our being chosen beforehand for salvation is by definition being predestined for salvation.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, I believe that being predestined to Christlikeness, justification, glorification, and adoption is also by definition being predestined for salvation.
So yes, I believe we are both chosen and predestined for salvation.
alright - is it rebuttal time?
ReplyDeleteYep. At your pleasure.
ReplyDeleteOK - I'll type as long as I see the green light ;^)
ReplyDeleteThe statement was: "That God chooses who will be saved".
It's not that I disagree with this resolution, no more than I could disagree with the statement "The American flag has the color blue in it".
The problem I have with the statement is the same problem I would have with the American flag statement - it's not that it's wrong - it's just not the whole story.
The American flag indeed has the color blue in it - but it also has the color's red and white in it as well.
So in my reply, I will attempt to add the 'red' and 'white' to the resolved statement.
I think we agree that none would seek the Lord unless He first seeks them. Scripture declares however that God seeks all. Over and over we see the call for "all who thirst to come and drink", "all who are wicked turn to Him and rely on His mercy".
Does God choose those who will be saved? Yes He does. But it is crystal clear in scripture that God actually has chosen all humanity for salvation (John 3:17,17; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 Timothy 4:10; Isa. 55:1,7, to name a few).
To even say God chooses who will be saved is to imply that not everyone is chosen which simply does not hold up to the light of scripture.
2 Peter 2:1 is a but one clear text that that Jesus' atoning death was for all - even false teachers that were leading people to hell whom Peter says, "the deny the Lord who bought them - and bring on themselves swift destruction." The sin of all mankind has been atoned for - not all will believe and receive it however.
Yes, God chooses those who will be saved in the sense that He has chosen all men for salvation - which leads to the next point - mankind has to choose God.
Those who don't choose to serve Christ wrath has been appointed to them. Jesus states this in Mark 16:16 - believe and be saved - don't believe and be damned.
2 Thess. 2:13 has been emphasized as a verse that shows we are chosen by God - and it does show that - but a reading of the entire passage shows that we also must choose - and that salvation coming to us is predicated on a person repenting and believing the truth.
Believing in Christ for salvation, however does not constitute man adding anything to his salvation (Acts 16:31), it is simply the scriptural condition for receiving salvation.
Additionally, I fail to see how being 'chosen to be God's people', is not similar at some level as being chosen for salvation. This point is important because if someone who is chosen to be "God's people" can reject that call (which some have obviously done), then logically and scripturally someone chosen to receive salvation could be able to reject that call as well.
The question inevitably will surface - why would someone want to reject salvations call? Ask the rich young ruler, ask the Pharisees, ask the angry mob at Mars Hill, ask the angry mob shouting "crucify him" in the Gospels.
People have an ongoing history of not being able to do the right thing - that they would reject God's choosing for salvation should not come as a surprise to anyone (Luke 10:16; Jn.15:18).
1. What do you think it means "to choose?"
ReplyDelete2. What causes one man to choose salvation and another man to reject it?
3. When you say that God has chosen all humanity for salvation, do you mean he even chose all those who lived and died before the coming of Christ?
4. How does your view that God choses everyone for salvation fit with Jesus' declaration in Mark 13:20 that only few are chosen?
1. Exactly that - to be chosen.
ReplyDelete2. The reasons are as varied as there are humans. Most of the time it's because men love darkness and their sin and aren't willing to part with it.
3. God has always had an interest in men repenting from sin and serving Him from the very beginning - it was just done differently before Christ's death.
4. I know you mean Mark 13:20, but it sounds like you may be quoting Jesus' parable on the wedding feast "many are called but few are chosen"; Mark 13:20 says: "And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he has chosen, he has shortened the days."
To cover the bases - let me respond to both passages - because I believe ultimately both passages are making the same point.
In the parable statement "many are called...few are chosen", the word 'many' (in both Greek and English) mean a large group. But in English, “many” is restrictive, (meaning a lot were left out) but in Greek it is inclusive - meaning virtually everyone.
In this case, we are dealing with a Greek usage that divides the whole into two unequal parts, which are called the many and the few.
In Greek you might say, “The many are on time, but the few are late.” The English equivalent is, “Most are on time, but some are late.” In Greek, “the many” and “the few” add up to everyone; just as in English, “most” and “some” add up to everyone.
So (to shorten my answer) in the end, everyone had been invited, but only a few were permitted to stay for the wedding. In other words, everyone is called, but some people refuse the invitation and are not chosen.
This parable does not mean that God calls a lot of people, picks over them, and keeps only a few. If that were true, the middle of the parable wouldn't make much sense. It simply means that God calls everyone and gives them the power to respond — but to be chosen, we must respond to the call.
The Mark 13:20 passage simply hearkens to the same point - God has called everyone - but only the few who choose Him are the 'chosen'.
A thousand pardons, but I must delay my next response for a time. I'll plan on taking the negative to your "God chooses everyone for salvation" position, and I'll try to have something to you by the end of the weekend.
ReplyDeleteCheers!
np bro - take your time - I'm moving into the busy part of my week now...
ReplyDeleteHey, I'm back for a moment. Before I jump to the negative, I'd like to squeeze in one round of follow up questions, if ya don't mind. Each question responds to the corresponding number from my first round.
ReplyDelete1. I'm unfamiliar with the practice of defining an active verb by merely repeating it in the passive voice. Could you perhaps elaborate upon your understanding of "to choose." After all, the meaning of the term is a pretty important issue in this discussion.
2. What is it that causes some men to love darkness and their sin and to be unwilling to part with it?
3. I understand you think God had an interest in saving the pre-Christian dead, but I want to know if you think He chose them for salvation.
4. You say in one place that God has chosen all men for salvation and in another that he only chooses those who choose him. Please explain.
1. Not trying to be difficult here, but it depends on the context.
ReplyDelete2. The choice they make.
3 & 4. Christ died for all people - the offer of salvation is extended to every human being - I suppose you could say that they've been chosen to receive this wonderful gift. Being "chosen" and being "the chosen" are different things. All men have been chosen to receive the free gift of salvation - it's available to every human being, how could we say otherwise? BUT, only those who choose Christ become 'the chosen' or I suppose one could say 'the saved'. As in, only 'the chosen' will see God - yet every man had the opportunity to come to the banquet, but not every man will choose to do so.
Please understand I'm not saying, nor would I ever say that all men are saved (like Brian McClaren or Carlton Pearson's heretical teachings say) - I'm merely stating that salvation has been offered to all mankind - otherwise, and again, why else would Christ tell us to 'go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature'?
I would say the most reasonable conclusion, and what I believe Eric is describing the the concept of the atonement having dual aspects?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.withchrist.org/atonement.htm
John N. Darby proposed that Christ’s atonement had two aspects—the propitiatory (God-ward) and the substitutionary (Man-ward) and that both Arminians and Calvinists were both guilty of exclusively seeing only one or the other. Drawing upon the work of Christ pictured in the two goats of Leviticus 16, he makes the case that the propitiatory aspect of Christ’s death was for all, while the substitutionary aspect was for the elect only. The fully biblical viewpoint was to understand, embrace, and hold in balance both aspects. See Propitiation and Substitution, The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby, Doctrinal No. 8, pp. 286-288.
I've decided not to try to rebut your position that God chooses everyone for salvation, the reason being that, even though I can't prevail upon you to define "to choose" for me, I suspect that all that you're really saying is that God has chosen to save any person who repents and believes. With this I would agree.
ReplyDeleteBut now let me try and phrase the question in such a way as to maybe get a little closer to our real disagreement.
We both agree that God has chosen to save all who repent and believe the gospel. We both agree that some men choose to repent and and believe and some do not. So here's my question for you: what role, if any, do you think God plays in determining who will choose to repent and believe?
Chosen is being picked or selected - that's what I referred to earlier.
ReplyDeleteWhy some believe and repent and why some do not I think is best explained by Jesus in His explanation of the parable of the sower in Mark 4 - which also answers your question on God's role in all of this. The seed goes out to whosoever - their response and why they respond the way they do/did is contained in Jesus' Mark 4 explanation.
Does God have any role in determining the condition of the different soils?
ReplyDeleteI think Jesus makes it pretty clear who is responsible for the soil and their response to the Word:
ReplyDelete"they hear the word..."
"they have no root in themselves..."
"they fall away..."
"the desires for other things enter in and choke the word, and it proves unfruitful."
I understand that the soils make their choices based on the kinds of soil they are, and that they are responsible for the choices they make, but I what to know if you think God has any role in determining what kind of soil they will be in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI think we're getting ready to march around Jericho again, however from my studies of theology and the God of the Bible, I cannot find anywhere in the Word where God has predetermined certain souls will go to hell, leaving them with no possible chance of salvation ever. Again, that would make God unjust, which is impossible.
ReplyDeleteI understand where and why some do come to that conclusion based on their interpretations of a few select scriptures - I simply don't accept those interpretations as I believe they create bigger unanswered questions, more contradictions and ultimately an unbiblical big picture of God.
The soils are what they are. Some men will never be saved, and from all natural appearances don't have the slightest inclination to ever choose Christ. However, many of the aforementioned can and do turn to Christ - and it's based on the choice that lies in the heart of a man and his response to the wooing of the Holy Spirit. Some men resist the Holy Spirit, some respond.
I realize that doesn't sound as grandiose as God choosing who's saved and not saved, but in my estimation it's better than believing that God actually planned and wanted Adam and Eve to fall in the garden and then put on fake surprise and dismay when they sinned.