# i need help with the "L"



## johnny_redeemed (May 28, 2004)

i was discussing Limited Atonement with a friend and he brought up a verse i was unfamiliar with, so could you guys help?

1 Tim 4:9-10
9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance. 10 For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe. 
NKJV



p.s. i want to thank you guys from the bottom of my heart. i am SO thankful for this board. THANK YOU!!


----------



## Ianterrell (May 28, 2004)

Christ is THE only one who saves men. He is the Savior. He just isn't saving everybody. If Christ is actually the savior of all men, than that means everybone is henceforth saved. They are damned no longer for sin. This view makes God spiteful. It means God is punishing innocent men.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (May 28, 2004)

There's two ways to look at this when comparing Scripture with Scripture which provide harmony with particular redemption. Either way I think will fit fine and answer the objections of Arminians.

1) The Greek scholars can proably enlighten you better on this point, but the word 'Savior' here can be translated more correctly as Preserver, so that God is the Preserver of all men or sustains there earthly lives, kinda the same sense as when Paul spoke in Athens, Acts 17:28 &quot;for in Him we live and move and have our being,&quot; and thus more particularly to believers (Rom. 8:28, &quot;all things work together for good to those who love God&quot.

2) He is the only Savior available to all men. There is no other Savior for them to turn to. So in this sense he can be the Savior of all men, especially those who believe.


----------



## Saiph (May 28, 2004)

All men without &quot;distinction&quot; not ALL men without &quot;exception&quot;.

In other words, Christ is the saviour of many types of men, ie. from many nations.


----------



## Christopher (May 28, 2004)

I would agree with Sailor. However, I would have no problem with the word being traslated &quot;savior&quot;. God, in a sence is the &quot;Savior of all people&quot; in that He has preserved their lives through the Noatic Covenant. They also enjoy common grace. I think the distinction is the quality of salvation to the two groups: all people and those who believe. God is especsialy savior to those who are Believers.


----------



## Irishcat922 (May 29, 2004)

look up all the verses in the New Testament with the word All in them. All doesn't allways mean all.:bs2:


----------



## Me Died Blue (May 29, 2004)

Johnny, one passage that was helpful for me in understanding what is meant by passages like that was Acts 10:34-25 (ESV): &quot;So Peter opened his mouth and said: 'Truly I understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.' &quot; Here it says that God shows no partiality/favoritism, and contrasts such favoritism with a mention of how God accepts people from every nation. It doesn't say, &quot;God shows no partiality, but accepts all men,&quot; but rather, it essentially says, &quot;God shows no partiality, but accepts men from every nation,&quot; thus showing that it is the ethnicity and culture than is universalistic, rather than each individual.

In Christ,

Chris


----------



## alwaysreforming (May 29, 2004)

All of these have been extremely helpful posts! (Even though I'm not the one with the original question.) 

And as IrishCat wrote:
&quot;look up all the verses in the New Testament with the word All in them. All doesn't always mean all.&quot;

Something that I got from Hank Hanegraff is, and this will serve you well in many different contexts:

We can't always pour the ultimate meaning into every word. For example, &quot;Saved&quot; won't always mean &quot;saved&quot; in the ultimate sense. 
&quot;All&quot; won't always mean &quot;all&quot;. 
&quot;World&quot; doesn't always mean whole, entire world.
&quot;Everyone&quot; might not always mean every, single, individual who ever lived.
And so on....

You'll find this to be the case again and again. Look at Job and how he was considered &quot;blameless&quot; or &quot;righteous.&quot; Surely this isn't the same level of blame-less-ness that Christ had, that is required to enter Heaven. Examples like this are too numerous to count. Which is again, why I am so much in disfavor of &quot;prooftexting&quot; each other. Your friend is trying to build a DOCTRINE on one verse!

When Paul talks about us being &quot;perfect&quot;, he can, but we still sin. Etc, etc, etc..


And while I'm at it, let me throw in the other quote that Hank Hanegraaf said that is in the same vain:
&quot;Don't try to make a parable walk on all fours!&quot; You'll need this one a lot, too!


----------

