Are there Bible only Christians who understand Jesus suffered and died for them in particular?

[Abba]

I wonder if there are bible only Christians who understand Jesus died for them in particular and suffered for their particular sins. I can see the Catholic Church drawing this wisdom from the bible (such as the Trinity) but she understands she has the authority and values Tradition.

If there are bible-only churches who hold this belief, can you explain to me how you came to such an understanding?

Thank you for your time.

+++

Btw, does any one know if there is any mention of this in the CCC or any Church documents? Thank you.

 

[Fauken]

I wonder if there are bible only Christians who understand Jesus died for them in particular and suffered for their particular sins. I can see the Catholic Church drawing this wisdom from the bible (such as the Trinity) but she understands she has the authority and values Tradition.

If there are bible-only churches who hold this belief, can you explain to me how you came to such an understanding?

Thank you for your time.

+++

Btw, does any one know if there is any mention of this in the CCC or any Church documents? Thank you.

I’m a little confused. What do you think they believe?

 

[Abba]

I’m a little confused. What do you think they believe?

I guess what can be called ‘generic’ salvation. Meaning by which that Jesus is our savior and He died for us all, and thru Him we are saved etc… but not necessarily that He died for each individual in particular and suffered for the sins of each particular individual.

On account of His sacrifice, we are saved and the gate of heaven was opened and people can go to heaven now (the fathers were released from the Abode of the Fathers etc…) and because of His sacrifice we can be forgiven for our particular sins and go to heaven. Something like that…

 

[MikeFr]

I’ve been non-Catholic all my life. No church I’ve been a member of has ever taught “generic” salvation as you presented it.

I have read that some mainline protestant denominations might believe this sort of thing - but I’ve never heard of it in the more conservative evangelical churches.

Blessings,

Mike

 

[Abba]

I’ve been non-Catholic all my life. No church I’ve been a member of has ever taught “generic” salvation as you presented it.

Thank you for your response.

So, your church draws from the bible particular salvation? How?

 

[porthos11]

Sounds like Calvinism - limited atonement, the L in TULIP; that Christ died only for the elect.

 

[Abba]

Here are some bible quotes:

Isaiah 53:4-6
Surely he has borne our infirmities
and carried our diseases;
yet we accounted him stricken,
struck down by God, and afflicted.
But he was wounded for our transgressions,
crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the punishment that made us whole,
and by his bruises we are healed.
All we like sheep have gone astray;
we have all turned to our own way,
and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

Matthew 8:17Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

17 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.

John 3
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man son of man be lifted up: 15 that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Galatians 2:20Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Psalm 147:4
He determines the number of the stars and calls them each by name.

The belief is not denied, but it is not clearly presented and it can be somewhat drawn. Certainly, without the authority of the Church given that it is so biblically vulnerable and fragile - who would dare. I think the Trinity is more strong in the bible - yet it is not obvious for all to see.

I am not arguing against this understanding, I am actually trying to undersand how and where it was drawn from the bible. And, I am trying to find it in Church documents.

I am just advertising my ignorance here. But, enough for ignorance - I want to learn.

 

[DaveBj]

I’ve been non-Catholic all my life. No church I’ve been a member of has ever taught “generic” salvation as you presented it.

I have read that some mainline protestant denominations might believe this sort of thing - but I’ve never heard of it in the more conservative evangelical churches.

Blessings,

Mike

Almost a complete ditto.

I grew up in a Pentecostal church and spent my adult Christian life from 1976 to my Tiber crossing in 2004-5 in Evangelical churches. I never heard anything like the “generic salvation” that the OP mentioned; it was always that Christ died for me.

 

[Abba]

I think the only bible quote that may be argued substantiates the understanding of particular salvation is:

Galatians 2:20Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

I think this quote can be analyzed to see if it stands the test. The others can be said to illuminate this understanding but only after it has been established.

There are so-called ‘Christian’ churches that do not believe in the Trinity because according to them it is not in the bible. Yet, the Catholic Church has illuminated the text and drew out of it the doctrine of the Trinity. Those who are able to see it, can go to the bible and without question see it. But, it is not explicit nor necessarily self evident. And this is the reason we find bible only churches who do not accept the understanding of a triune God.

What would be interesting for me to learn is if there are bible only churches who do not accept the Trinity yet accept particular salvation. I just wonder how they could have drawn that from Paul in Galatians 2:20. I would think they just adopted it from the Catholic Church - maybe even unperceived, because it is not a biblically obvious understanding.

+++

Catholics, is there any mentioned of this in the CCC or Church documents or has any mystic/saint/theologian/Doctor of the Church etc… written of particular salvation?

Thank you for you time.

 

[Abba]

Sounds like Calvinism - limited atonement, the L in TULIP; that Christ died only for the elect.

Aaah, I’m not familiar with that and was checking it out in Wiki.

“The doctrine states that though the death of Jesus Christ is sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world,[1] it was the intention of God the Father that the atonement of Christ’s death would work itself out in the elect only, thereby leading them without fail to salvation.[2] This is in contrast to a belief that it depends not only on God’s election but also on individual human being’s decision whether Christ’s atonement will be effective to that individual.” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_atonement

I see. Well, what this serves in my little query here is to show that indeed, one can read and re-read the bible (as I have) and not necessarily walk away with the understanding of particular salvation.

My Catholic upbringing was abruptly interrupted when I was sent to a foreign country at an early age. I have been since the age of nine on my own and when a child with people who refused to take my to Mass never mind contribute to my Catholic upbringing. So, there came a point where I kind of like started teaching myself. This ended up being a lot of bible reading for decades even after I formally re-united with my Church. But, I have never walked away from Sacred Scripture with the understanding of particular salvation.

I would’ve really have to have started splitting hair with Galatians to possibly walk away with that understanding and why would I do that? It seems obvious to me the Catholic Church illuminated the text and drew this understanding along with her Tradition and the guidance of the Holy Spirit and others bible-only churches have just adopted it.

 

[Hatikvah]

Sounds like Calvinism - limited atonement, the L in TULIP; that Christ died only for the elect.

Yeah, but I don’t think that the Calvinists even remember that St. Augustine didn’t formulate the same thing as they claim! (Both Luther and Calvin took from St. Augustine, and they ended up with different results!)

I might need some clarification before I answer, Abba. You mean salvation in the form of limited atonement, correct? We are “chosen” by God (because He definitely doesn’t want to save as many of us as He can ) and receive salvation?

As with many issues, I take Luther’s view because it is rational but, like the Catholic view, it does not lean towards something very drastic (i.e., Ultra-Arminianism or Hyper-Calvinism):

Lutherans do not believe that there are certain people that are predestined to salvation, but salvation is predestined for those who seek God. Lutherans believe Christians should be assured that they are among the predestined. However, they disagree with those who make predestination the source of salvation rather than Christ’s suffering, death, and resurrection.

To sum up Luther’s view as I see it:

1. God has created us;
2. Jesus Christ has died for us (unlimited atonement, but vague);
3. We choose Jesus or we do not in this life;
4. God provides us with good works to “walk in” (akin to actual grace; faith gives way to works and repentance) (John 14:12, Eph. 2:8-10)
5. Salvation is received by those who accept the forgiveness of sins, blah blah blah

 

[Contarini]

I guess what can be called ‘generic’ salvation. Meaning by which that Jesus is our savior and He died for us all, and thru Him we are saved etc… but not necessarily that He died for each individual in particular and suffered for the sins of each particular individual.

On account of His sacrifice, we are saved and the gate of heaven was opened and people can go to heaven now (the fathers were released from the Abode of the Fathers etc…) and because of His sacrifice we can be forgiven for our particular sins and go to heaven. Something like that…

Actually, many Protestants accuse Catholics of teaching “generic salvation”–that Jesus just made salvation possible but our specific sins have to be atoned for through the sacrifice of the Mass, through works of penance, etc.

Protestants, especially evangelicals, emphasize the idea that Jesus died for the sins of individuals more, if anything, than Catholics do. Five-point Calvinists, in particular, carry this to the point of saying that anyone for whom Jesus died will be saved–that Jesus died for specific people and that all those people will be saved. (“Limited Atonement,” though the Calvinists prefer “definite atonement,” and these days there are some folks who suggest that it’s possible that Jesus died in this way for everyone.)

 

[MikeFr]

I’ve not heard the term “particular salvation” before. I need to research what this phrase means.

Not saying there’s anything wrong with it but I hesitate using phrases like that.

I am always cautious about saying anything about another group’s theology unless I am very familiar with that other group first. I say this because there have been many comments made by a member of one Christian group about other Christian groups which could be incorrect. There have been many comments about “protestants” I have heard which, at least in my experience, are at best incomplete or sometimes even incorrect.

I am sure that Roman Catholics can identify with hearing those types of things. Someone tells you what Roman Catholics believe but you know it is completely untrue.

So I won’t be tagged with believing in “particular salvation” until I figure out what it means.

Blessings,

Mike

 

[Abba]

I’ve not heard the term “particular salvation” before. I need to research what this phrase means.

Not saying there’s anything wrong with it but I hesitate using phrases like that.

Mike, I just picked that word from the English language. It could have just as well been ‘specifically.’ The matter is that Catholics believe that Jesus died for each person as an individual and suffered on the cross the sins each committed and this is how they can be forgiven because Jesus already paid for their sins to the Father. The statements go that when Jesus was on the cross he forsaw each individual and suffered so that each individual persons would be saved. So, when Jesus was on the cross he foreknew you and suffered the sins you committed and the ones you will be committing before you die.

This is not contrary to the bible, but it is not explicit in the bible. I just hear people say 'Jesus died for you" etc… like a worn out cliche but they cannot get into a profound discussion on it. They were taught this and they believe it. But, if you try to get info on it - rien de rien.

I cannot find any mention of it in Catholic documents etc… it would help my belief and I can integrate it into my spiritual life if I could have some profound explanation, not people repeating cliches they have heard.

I thought some people in non-Catholic Christian religions which hold this belief would demonstrate to me how it is explicit in the bible. But, by just reading up on the Protestants it becomes obvious that it cannot be - so I was correct. This is my dilemma.

 

[Abba]

I have never read the Summa completely. I have just skimmed it here and there. I’m searching to see if Aquinas considered that when Jesus was suffering the Passion, he suffered on account of me in particular and offered Himself on account of the particular individuals. So far I have not found anything. Not that if Saint Aquinas said it is unrefutable, I don’t agree with him with all of his understandings but, I don’t prejudge a point either.

This article is interesting:
Saint Thomas Aquinas: On Salvation and Atonement in Christ
academia.edu/6970520/Saint_Thomas_Aquinas_On_Salvation_and_Atonement_in_Christ

 

[Abba]

I find someone who addresses this question; Gregory of Nissa. I will look into it tomorrow.

books.google.com/books?id=5yYTDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA94&dq=individual+salvation&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjjr_fR5I3PAhXD2SYKHVRfAXY4ChDoAQgjMAE#v=onepage&q=individual%20salvation&f=false

Good night.:yawn:

 

[Contarini]

I find someone who addresses this question; Gregory of Nissa. I will look into it tomorrow.

books.google.com/books?id=5yYTDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA94&dq=individual+salvation&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjjr_fR5I3PAhXD2SYKHVRfAXY4ChDoAQgjMAE#v=onepage&q=individual%20salvation&f=false

Good night.:yawn:

The secondary source you link to there is talking about the view, common in the Greek Church Fathers, that Jesus redeems humanity, changing what it means to be human.

This view was largely lost in the West. Augustine taught that even after Jesus’ redemptive work, humanity as a whole is the “massa damnata,” condemned because of Adam’s sin, and that only certain people would be moved by the Holy Spirit to repent and believe and thus receive the fruits of salvation. Many in the later Calvinist tradition, which built on Augustine but broke away from Catholic orthodoxy, took this further to say that Jesus specifically died for certain people and that those people, and only they, would be saved.

Because that’s the problem the “particular salvation” view runs into. It seems to imply either that everyone is saved (which would be great, but Scripture and Tradition probably don’t allow us to be confident that it will happen) or that Jesus didn’t die for everyone.

I think you may be using a weaker form of the concept, which wouldn’t be controversial.

There are a lot of references to the idea that Jesus died for us as individuals (in the “weaker” sense in which you seem to be using it–not necessarily in the sense that guarantees an individual’s salvation) in Catholic devotional literature. See especially Julian of Norwich’s Revelations of Divine Love chaps. 12-13 in the short text.

And by the way, as far as I’m concerned Gregory of Nyssa and Julian of Norwich are two of the greatest teachers in the whole Christian tradition.

Edwin

 

[DaveBj]

snip

Because that’s the problem the “particular salvation” view runs into. It seems to imply either that everyone is saved (which would be great, but Scripture and Tradition probably don’t allow us to be confident that it will happen) or that Jesus didn’t die for everyone.

snip

Neither one is what I grew up with. What I was taught was that Christ died for everyone and that God is “not willing for anyone to perish, but for all to come to repentance” (II Peter 3:9, but that not all will accept His sacrifice on their behalf.

 

[Abba]

The secondary source you link to there is talking about the view, common in the Greek Church Fathers, that Jesus redeems humanity, changing what it means to be human.

This view was largely lost in the West. Augustine taught that even after Jesus’ redemptive work, humanity as a whole is the “massa damnata,” condemned because of Adam’s sin, and that only certain people would be moved by the Holy Spirit to repent and believe and thus receive the fruits of salvation. Many in the later Calvinist tradition, which built on Augustine but broke away from Catholic orthodoxy, took this further to say that Jesus specifically died for certain people and that those people, and only they, would be saved.

Because that’s the problem the “particular salvation” view runs into. It seems to imply either that everyone is saved (which would be great, but Scripture and Tradition probably don’t allow us to be confident that it will happen) or that Jesus didn’t die for everyone.

I think you may be using a weaker form of the concept, which wouldn’t be controversial.

There are a lot of references to the idea that Jesus died for us as individuals (in the “weaker” sense in which you seem to be using it–not necessarily in the sense that guarantees an individual’s salvation) in Catholic devotional literature. See especially Julian of Norwich’s Revelations of Divine Love chaps. 12-13 in the short text.

And by the way, as far as I’m concerned Gregory of Nyssa and Julian of Norwich are two of the greatest teachers in the whole Christian tradition.

Edwin

For a while I was feeling a little lonely and on my own with this question, but, whoa! I have found people in history who pondered the same. It’s like I opened a new door which I didn’t even know was there and there are souls pondering on this issue and with no limit nor restriction. It’s like they have let the goose loose intellectually and imaginatively on this issue. Well, I will read what they came up with and get back to this thread.

This actually got complicated really quickly because of all the things people have considered and the different extreme they took certain understandings. I will take a look at Gregory of Nissa, Julian of Norwich, Augustine, (Calvin, Luther) etc…

I am going to have to use my brain to understand what they are all saying. This got heavy duty really quickly, especially with Saint Gregory of Nissa & Saint Agustine. It seems as though people disagree with their understanding of what these two writers are really saying on the topic. Oh, boy. I want to read directly Gregory of Nissa not a commentary. If you know where I can find what he wrote on this issue, let me know.

 

[MikeFr]

The matter is that Catholics believe that Jesus died for each person as an individual and suffered on the cross the sins each committed and this is how they can be forgiven because Jesus already paid for their sins to the Father. The statements go that when Jesus was on the cross he forsaw each individual and suffered so that each individual persons would be saved. So, when Jesus was on the cross he foreknew you and suffered the sins you committed and the ones you will be committing before you die.

I agree with the above statement and from a very cursory scripture review it may not be explicit. One way to view this is that as fully God Jesus Christ knew everything. I understnd that isn’t explicitly stating your message, but if Jesus is omniscient it would logically follow.

One passage which might indirectly address this is Colossians 1:17-20:

“…he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. 19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.”