HT:Juan Sanchez

[dust] **cough, cough***

Wow, anything going on in this place? Maybe I should post something.

"Christ died for your sins"

[Excerpt follows]

The statements “Christ died for his people only” and “Christ died for all people” are both true in some senses, and too often the argument over this issue has been confused because of various senses that can be given to the word “for” in these two statements.

The statement “Christ died for his people only” can be understood to mean that “Christ died to actually pay the penalty for all the sins of his people only.”  In that sense it is true.  But when non-Reformed people hear the sentence “Christ died for his people only,” they often hear in it, “Christ died so that he could make the gospel available only to a chosen few,” and they are troubled over what they see as a real threat to the free offer of the gospel to every person.  Reformed people who hold to a particular redemption should understand the potential for misunderstanding that arises with the sentence, “Christ died for his people only,” and, out of concern for the truth and out of pastoral concern to affirm the free offer of the gospel and to avoid misunderstanding in the body of Christ, they should be more precise in saying exactly what they mean.  The simple sentence, “Christ died for his people only,” while true in the sense explained above, is seldom understood in that way when people unfamiliar with Reformed doctrine hear it, and it therefore is better not to use such an ambiguous statement at all.

On the other hand, the sentence, “Christ died for all people,” is true if it means, “Christ died to make salvation available to all people” or if it means, “Christ died to bring the free offer of the gospel to all people.”  In fact, this is the kind of language Scripture itself uses in passages like John 6:51; 1 Timothy 2:6; and 1 John 2:2.(fn)  It really seems to be only nit-picking that creates controversies and useless disputes when Reformed people insist on being such purists in their speech that they object any time someone says that “Christ died for all people.”  There are certainly acceptable ways of understanding that sentence that are consistent with the speech of the scriptural authors themselves.

Similarly, I do not think we should rush to criticize an evangelist who tells a body of unbelievers, “Christ died for your sins,” if it is made clear in the context that it is necessary to trust in Christ before one can receive the benefits of the gospel offer.  In that sense the sentence is simply understood to mean “Christ died to offer you forgiveness for your sins” or “Christ died to make available forgiveness for your sins.”  The important point here is that sinners realize that salvation is available for everyone and that payment of sins is available for everyone.

[end]

excerpt from: Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, (Grand Rapids: InterVarsity, 1994), pp.601-602.

With an overall lack of study these days as more and more up and coming theologians finding their pedogogy in blog posts and praxis in the comment streams, I offer this simple reminder to study.  Pastors are the resident theologians of the churches.  It is vital that they equip themselves with a sound biblical foundation and full sampling of knowledge and ideas from across the evangelical theological spectrum when considering the idea of public teaching, especially over the internet.  I pray that this post, which represents a major voice in seminary classrooms today, spurs pastors on to become better theologians, better representatives of Christ and His church, and ultimately better witnesses of the gospel handed down to us.

Come and hear Harold O'Chester, Jerry Chaddick, Jake Thornhill, Michael Lewis, Herb Reavis and Bob Pitman at Andice Baptist Church this week.  This is a part of our week long building dedication emphasis.  Questions?  See www.andicebaptist.com.

Numbers Wordled