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

[MikeFr]

I must hasten to add that this IMHO does not refer to Universalism which is not taught in scripture, also IMHO.

Blessings,

Mike

 

[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.

They are saying that Saint Gregory of Nissa does not use the concept of ‘universal human nature’ for the Fall and Salvation but he consistently uses it for the doctrine of Creation and the Eschaton (the final event in the divine plan; the end of the world). I can see why and how he would use the concept in the Creation (not sure how he applies it in the Eschaton). But, supposedly he is not using it in the Fall and Salvation, and this makes sense because I don’t think God would change humanity. What a violation that would be!God would not violate humanity, He respects us.

I am not familiar with the Greek Fathers. So, they think that God changed human nature?!? Which ones think this?

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,

This makes sense to me and not only humanity but the whole world. Nature groans for the coming of the Lord.

(Augustine) …and that only certain people would be moved by the Holy Spirit to repent and believe and thus receive the fruits of salvation.

Really?!? He said this? Do you have a quote?

This does not make sense. Then where is the Free Will? Then, how can God judge? Who would He judge, the ones He did not inspire to be saved?

Maybe this is a misreading of Augustine which was also done by Calvin(?).

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.

This is theologically illogical and biblically unsound. Again, why have Judgement Day. This is to deny Jesus is the Just Judge who He is. How can one judge people one has condemned to sin and not be saved from the beginning of time? Even before they would have come to life, they would have come to an existence pre-condenmed to be sinners and evildoers. This is not sound.

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.

Everyone is saved versus Jesus didn’t die for everyone

The ‘particular’ does not end up with either of those two erroneous understandings. Insofar as the idea of ‘everyone being saved’ this is not ground in Sacred Scripture. That is just someone giving his imagination a license. I could take a little flight and say we don’t know as we have limited knowledge in considering that we do not know God’s thoughts(Job 38) and pretty much if He wants all of His creation saved it’s His prerogative. But, this is not biblical.

I think you may be using a weaker form of the concept, which wouldn’t be controversial.
It’s not just weaker, it’s different. The idea is that God made it possible for us to be saved - the narrow gate, but it’s up to us to go thru it. And, Jesus died for all of the sins of the world, but this does not necessarily mean that He thought of me when He was on the cross, it does mean that anyone can be saved if they chose the narrow gate (even those who do not know Jesus - “…their conscious bearing witness…”) This is what I walked away with from Sacred Scripture. My fellow Catholics understand that Jesus suffered on the cross for their particular sins and foreknew them on the cross and maintain, of course, that it is up to each individual to go thru the narrow gate.

I mean, I suppose it could be said that if He suffered for all the sins of the world and I am a sinner, He suffered on account of me.

Catholic devotional literature. See especially Julian of Norwich’s Revelations of Divine Love chaps. 12-13 in the short text.

Edwin

I am looking this up. Thanks.

 

[Abba]

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.

For clarity sake, the above does not imply that He suffered only for those who will ultimately be saved. He suffered all the sins committed, but, it is up to the individual to enter the thru the narrow gate. To take advantage of the opportunity, but, even if they don’t - He still suffered for them.

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.”

Yeah, I think the answer may lie in taking a bird’s eye view of Sacred Scripture and Salvation History. Yet, even if I consider Cain and Abel and communities e.g. Israelites it does not refute nor deny my understanding. I will read up and pray on it.

I just came to a barrier spiritually and I thought that perhaps because I do not understand this whole thing about Jesus having thought of me and suffering for me on the cross that this is causing the barrier. It may not be the thing causing the barrier though, the barrier is that I do not totally appreciate ‘penance.’ I know, it’s awful, but that is what it is. I do it but not from the heart, because I don’t totally appreciate it. I just wish I could appreciate it more. This is where having my Catholic upbringing interrupted abruptly has interfered a little. The people that were raising me, did a lot of penance. It was part of their Catholic life. I remember one of the things one of my aunts would do was not to speak on Good Friday and walk barefoot to church. Other people would sleep on the floor as a penance etc…

 

[Abba]

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.

Me either.

The understanding I have had is in harmony with the quote you provide.

Even though I say this in reference to the quote above it on the post just above this one, it is not that I have held this understanding:

For clarity sake, the above does not imply that He suffered only for those who will ultimately be saved. He suffered all the sins committed, but, it is up to the individual to enter the thru the narrow gate. To take advantage of the opportunity, but, even if they don’t - He still suffered for them.

I am noting it to note that the understanding I have walked away with from Sacred Scripture does not necessarily mean that He suffered only for those who would be saved. But, in fact, the understanding I have held is that He did not die in particular for persons.

Instead, my understanding has been, well let me put it in a strange example but that will make the point. Imagine a bunch of banks or Joseph’s storehouses of grain. So, when I sin and repent; I can go to the bank or the storehouse and get forgiveness. I can cash in, if you will, on Jesus’s sacrifice.

I never really gave it much deep thought, but, now as I am thinking about it, it would be like Jesus suffered the sins man could, had and would commit but not in the uniquely applied sense. More like, Jesus suffered for the sin of Murder, Rape, Adultery etc… Something like that.

 

[alwayswill]

For clarity sake, the above does not imply that He suffered only for those who will ultimately be saved. He suffered all the sins committed, but, it is up to the individual to enter the thru the narrow gate. To take advantage of the opportunity, but, even if they don’t - He still suffered for them.

…

To atone means to appease the the wrath of God
Those in Hell are under the wrath of God

**Will there be anyone in Hell whose sins were atoned for by Christ?
**

 

[Abba]

To atone means to appease the the wrath of God
Those in Hell are under the wrath of God

**Will there be anyone in Hell whose sins were atoned for by Christ?
**

All of them.

The understanding is that they chose to be there. God respecting their free will and human dignity allows them to continue to exist as they wish.

 

[alwayswill]

All of them.

The understanding is that they chose to be there. God respecting their free will and human dignity allows them to continue to exist as they wish.

so was God’s wrath against those who reject God appeased ?

 

[alwayswill]

All of them.

The understanding is that they chose to be there. God respecting their free will and human dignity allows them to continue to exist as they wish.

2 Peter 3:9

• The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.*

---

Here the difference between the Reformed and the Catholic conception of God’s will is clearly seen.
Both Reformers and Catholics agree that God’s commands in Scripture reveal to us what he wants us to do,
and both agree that the commands in Scripture invite us to repent and trust in Christ for salvation.

Therefore, in one sense both agree that God wills that we be saved–it is the will that he reveals to us explicitly in the gospel invitation.

But both sides must also say that there is something else that God deems more important than saving everyone.

Reformed theologians say that God deems his own glory more important than saving everyone, and that (according to Rom. 9) God’s glory is also furthered by the fact that some are not saved.
Catholic theologians also say that something else is more important to God than the salvation of all people, namely, the preservation of man’s free will.

So in a Reformed system God’s highest value is His own glory,
and in an Catholic system God’s highest value is the free will of man.
These are two distinctly different conceptions of the nature of God

 

[Abba]

so was God’s wrath against those who reject God appeased ?

This question implies that God is angry with everyone. This is erroneous. God is LOVE. It’s like a parent who reprimands and corrects, but most us parents do not do it due to some individual imbalance, but in a healthy natural way to teach, correct and guide our children in the correct path. God created us out of His abundance of LOVE. He is LOVE itself.

It’s kind of like Plato’s Forms. What ‘love’ we experience here on earth is like the shadow made by the sun, it’s not even streaks of sunlight in comparison to His love. Never mind taking a look at the sun and feeling it’s heat.

 

[Abba]

2 Peter 3:9

• The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.*

Yes. However, this needs to be understood in context. He does not want anyone to perish, this is true, and He wants everyone to come to repentance.

I don’t want my children to end up doing time in some hard federal prison. This is true. I want them to finish their PhDs and find a good wife who will be a good mother to their children; preferably a pious Catholic (what a blessing this would be). And, yes, this is true.

However, I may want these things for my sons, but I also raised them, independent young men. I cannot force them, let’s say - not to marry someone I may consider not to be a good person and who would be an awful mother to the children (not that this is an actual the actual case, I am just presenting an example). They are free to make their decisions and their own mistakes. I can advice and guide them, but in the end, they make their own decisions.

So, if one decides one day to go and rob a bank and gets caught and ends up in federal prison, this does not mean that I did not want this for him. But, there are laws outside and they are applied - so since he did the crime he does the time.

What law’s, you may ask would apply that would sentence a soul to hell for all eternity. Aah, that is a good question. But, the phone is ringing. Gotta go.​

Here the difference between the Reformed and the Catholic conception of God’s will is clearly seen.
Both Reformers and Catholics agree that God’s commands in Scripture reveal to us what he wants us to do,
and both agree that the commands in Scripture invite us to repent and trust in Christ for salvation.

Therefore, in one sense both agree that God wills that we be saved–it is the will that he reveals to us explicitly in the gospel invitation.

But both sides must also say that there is something else that God deems more important than saving everyone.

Reformed theologians say that God deems his own glory more important than saving everyone, and that (according to Rom. 9) God’s glory is also furthered by the fact that some are not saved.
Catholic theologians also say that something else is more important to God than the salvation of all people, namely, the preservation of man’s free will.

So in a Reformed system God’s highest value is His own glory,
and in an Catholic system God’s highest value is the free will of man.
These are two distinctly different conceptions of the nature of God

This is so sad. So the Reformed think God is a** narcissistic monster**. :nope: How tragic.

I’ll be back.

 

[Abba]

So, if one decides one day to go and rob a bank and gets caught and ends up in federal prison, this does not mean that I did not want this for him. But, there are laws outside and they are applied - so since he did the crime he does the time.

Ooops. Meant to type: this does not mean that I wanted this for him.

Just like God does not want us to end up in hell for all eternity.

 

[alwayswill]

…
Just like God does not want us to end up in hell for all eternity.

Agreed
Yet there are those that will end up in hell.
Why?
What is greater than the desire of God?
You say it is the freewill of man
I say it is God’s glory.

Romans 9 22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?​

read that again: What is the “this” referring to in verse 23?

You say that makes him a narcissistic monster.

…
This is so sad. So the Reformed think God is a** narcissistic monster**. :nope: How tragic.

…

God says this
Isaiah 45

9 “Woe to those who quarrel with their Maker,
those who are nothing but potsherds
among the potsherds on the ground.
Does the clay say to the potter,
‘What are you making?’
Does your work say,
‘The potter has no hands’?
10 Woe to the one who says to a father,
‘What have you begotten?’
or to a mother,
‘What have you brought to birth?’
11 “This is what the Lord says—
the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker:
Concerning things to come,
do you question me about my children,
or give me orders about the work of my hands?
12 It is I who made the earth
and created mankind on it.
My own hands stretched out the heavens;
I marshaled their starry hosts.
…
19. I, the Lord, speak the truth;
I declare what is right.

 

[alwayswill]

This question implies that God is angry with everyone. This is erroneous. God is LOVE. It’s like a parent who reprimands and corrects, but most us parents do not do it due to some individual imbalance, but in a healthy natural way to teach, correct and guide our children in the correct path. God created us out of His abundance of LOVE. He is LOVE itself.
…

The question implies that every sinner is justly under the wrath of God unless they believe in the Son

John 3:36
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for** God’s wrath remains on them.**

 

[Abba]

Agreed
Yet there are those that will end up in hell.
Why?
What is greater than the desire of God?
You say it is the freewill of man
I say it is God’s glory.

Romans 9 22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?​

read that again: What is the “this” referring to in verse 23?

Hello alwayswill, I apologize for my delay in responding.

Well, I googled Romans 9:22 and woah! There are About 433,000 results. I can see whole religions have been established based on an erroneous understanding of Paul’s Letter to the Romans Chapter 9 verse 22. I do not have time to read what people have come to understand but I have an idea based on your understanding. I suppose it is one and the same. I am not a scholar, I am a simple laity with great faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ and this faith is not simply my doing but I understand to have been blessed with it by Our Lord and the Holy Spirit who illuminates us. Hence, I do not know the intellectual arguments that have been historically represented for this misreading of Romans 9:22 so I will simply respond to you based on my personal understanding as a Catholic Christian.

1. That said, I don’t think I will address all the issues in this one post; but I would like to note that there appears to be a misreading of 9:22 as you quote it in the above post. This may be due to translation, I don’t know. Nonetheless, as I read it; God wants to show the faithful His glory, not for His own glorification or whatever pleasure a person may imagine He will get out of it, but because of the joy and the experience of His love the saved will experience.

(I am going to number the general points - just so we don’t get lost not because they are in a particular order or are developing a particular train of thought. It will facilitate making reference to them.)

read that again: What is the “this” referring to in verse 23?

The ‘this’ would be: “the object of his wrath”.

I think to understand Romans 9:22 in such a way as to understand that what Paul is presenting to us is not a ‘narcissistic monster of a God’ but instead that ‘God is Love’; we must understand Romans 9:22 not only in the context of the whole of chapter 9 but in the whole book of Romans, and most importantly - in the context of Salvation History.

Consider Matthew 13:24-43:

24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: 25 but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. 26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. 27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? 28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? 29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Notice, the ‘man’ puts up with the weed because of the tares - ‘ye root up also the wheat with them.’ He holds back the object of his wrath (weed) because of the tares.

God says this
Isaiah 45

9 “Woe to those who quarrel with their Maker,
those who are nothing but potsherds
among the potsherds on the ground.
Does the clay say to the potter,
‘What are you making?’
Does your work say,
‘The potter has no hands’?
10 Woe to the one who says to a father,
‘What have you begotten?’
or to a mother,
‘What have you brought to birth?’
11 “This is what the Lord says—
the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker:
Concerning things to come,
do you question me about my children,
or give me orders about the work of my hands?
12 It is I who made the earth
and created mankind on it.
My own hands stretched out the heavens;
I marshaled their starry hosts.
…
19. I, the Lord, speak the truth;
I declare what is right.

Paul presents this very same argument twice in Romans. And, - it’s true.

May the peace of Lord Our Jesus Christ be with you,

Abba

 

[Abba]

Agreed
Yet there are those that will end up in hell.
Why?
What is greater than the desire of God?
You say it is the freewill of man
I say it is God’s glory.

Romans 9 22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?​

I have a few more free minutes here and I want to comment a little more on your question. In particular where you are pointing that people go to hell for all eternity not because of ‘free will’ but so God can glorify Himself. And that He has the power to make things right, yet, He chooses not to and so people will go to hell.

Interesting. Well, I had to confront this question myself at one point. Sure, it is only natural and normal to encounter this question/obstacle. We have a mind we use it to think and so we cannot help but consider: with all His power, if God is ‘Good/Love’ given all the suffering in the world and that many will go to hell for all eternity - why doesn’t He fix this situation if He is Love and is omnipotent?

Well, I would respond to this question that He loves us so much He respects our human dignity. He did not make us robots and I am personally glad He didn’t. He is not glorifying Himself, He is Love itself and created the universe, animals, and mankind out of love. People chose to go to hell, God does not send us there. The suffering is a result of our own sins. He could have created us unable to sin but, I am glad He didn’t.

 

[Abba]

I was just thinking about this and it occurred to me that John explicitly tells us that God is Love, but Paul in the Letter to the Romans -** demonstrates it**. To walk away from reading Paul’s letter to the Romans thinking that God is a wrathful, narcissistic monster - is to have missed the boat.



Peace