Did Jesus die in vain?

If you take the view:a) Jesus died potentially for all the sin of mankind.
b) Jesus died effectively for the sin of all the saved....then Jesus "did truly die for our sins". I can see how we (the saved) could be temporally and eternally grateful but cannot see how they (the unsaved) could do other than howl eternally in anguish and torment at their folly.I see no making-sense related issue with the world being full of sin. In order for Jesus to die for all our sin there has to be opporunity for us to sin. And if dying for everyone, the world could be expected to be full of it. It would make less sense if it wasn't.(Besides, the world isn't literally full of sin, there is lots of love and goodness and kindness in it too)

Sure, but you have to mix your time and eternity units along the way.When Gods wrath was poured out upon Jesus, he (God) extracted the price payable for the sin of those who would rely on God to pay the price due for their sin (whether living before, during or after the time of Christ). If all the people ever living had relied upon God in this way, then God would have extracted price A at the cross. If only one person out of all the people ever living had relied upon God in this way, then God would have extracted price Z.Jesus offered himself to pay for whatever the price might be. From A to Z or anything in between. That is what I mean by potentially paying for all. But if the potential is not released it can have no effect. The saved are those for who the potential payment has been rendered effective payment. Jesus has actually paid for their sin.

What do you mean by separate entity? Do you mean separate entity like I'm a separate entity to you (as far as we can tell). In that case then no, that's not my concept. A single entity God who finds expression through 3 harmonised and co-joined personhoods would be something of how I see it.In principle, forgiveness involves the offended party paying the price for the offence themselves. God is the one offended and is the one who forgives. And must be the one to pay the price. How that transaction works within the enterprise "God" is an internal accounting / legal / love /wrath etc matter for God.God offended / God forgives / God pays

I'm not sure that Gods book keeping need be of interest "to the rest of us". Spoken like a man on the outside looking in.

*shakes head* A pristine example of how satan's lie* works down to the core of even an intelligent, educated atheist. You must have been out on the day I was dealing with the illogic of that (* that you must do something to contribute to your salvation)Hi Larni.

You were looking for clarification on Jesus potentially paying for all sin vs. Jesus effectively paying only for the sin of the saved.Potential payment should be clear enough. It's like potential anything. It does nothing unless the potential is released.Effective payment should also be clear enough. It's like effective anything. It does things.In order to convert any potential into an effective, something must happen. The rock must be rolled off the hill, the light switch must be turned on, the tap must be opened.The saved are those for whom the potential has been unlocked and become effective. The eternally lost are those for whom the potential remained potential. Jesus doesn't pay for their sin. They pay for their sin themselves.Clearer?Edited by iano, : No reason given.

It should be clear by now that when you say "our", the grouping you are referring to must be mentioned as well. Is it:a) Affecting our (the saved) lives today?b) Affect our (the unsaved) lives today?It should also be clear that Jesus dying (potentially) for the sins of the unsaved will have no affect on their lives. At least, not until they become saved. How it affects the lives of the saved is a different and broader issue. I agree. To be expected (in unmistakable fashion) if most people are not saved. The Bible indicates that most people are not and will not be saved. Your belief is noted. I believe the precise opposite. Your welcome Edited by iano, : No reason given.

In his presentation of gospel mechanics (in the book of Romans), Paul deals with (only) a couple of objections that will arise in the mind of someone who is faced with the fall-out arising from the gospel of grace he is expounding.Yours is one of the couple. The bulk of Romans chap 6 was written to refute you. I sliced this bit out of the above objectioin due to it's Roman Catholic undertones - which have no place in a gospel of grace. Rid of it, your objection is a text book example.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

It was more like "not reject God's attempt to place the gift in your hands". The only thing your doing (eg: pulling your hands away) contributes to is your damnation.There is no doing of any description which contributes to your salvation. Except perhaps, doing nothing.In a nutshell. God will do all the work necessary to result in your salvation unless you prevent, reject and destroy what he attempts to achieve. The best thing for you to do is absolutely....nothing.

Free will? Who said that lost men had free will?

Whatever, I just thought it was of interest that of the very few objections to the gospel dealt with by Paul, yours was an example delivered in (almost) pristine form.The book of Romans is addressed to believers who might be labouring under the same illusion that you are w.r.t the gospel. There is no expectation that an unbeliever would give it the time of day.

Hi LegendI'm not quite sure what "acceptance of the belief" is supposed to mean precisely. On changing from not being a Christian to being a Christian, you believe that Jesus is... You don't "accept the belief" (whose belief do you mean?) that Jesus is...But I think I know what you mean. It might help if we stuck to a biblical example such as 'calling upon the name of the Lord'. As in: "and all who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved". Calling is something that is associated with the people doing the calling. Is this doing something? It might appear so...But what causes them to call out is God's action upon them. He squeezes and they squeak. So it is not really accurate to say that they are doing anything as such - given that their calling is completely God's doing. Edited by iano, : No reason given.

I repeat. There is no collective "our" when it comes to Jesus' purpose. He has one purpose for the saved. And another purpose for the non-saved (namely to make it possible that they be saved)Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Strictly speaking it's not Jesus who divides humanity this way but the God the Father who divides humanity this way. It's the Father who does the saving. Jesus is the key piece of 'equipment' (so to speak) used by the Father in the process of saving someone.Secondly, it's not God alone who divides in this way, but a combination of the interaction between man and God that divides humanity in this way. Some men don't reject God's efforts to save them and ...er... become saved. Other men do reject God's efforts to save them and remain lost (I say 'remain' because the lost condition is the default condition, the starting position... that all mankind is born into).Jesus figures in a persons salvation in various ways. The prime way in which he figures is in his acting as a receptacle into which a persons sin can be cast, by God. Once there, they are dealt with according to God's uncircumventable (uncircumventable even by God) justice. Currently, your sin acts as a barrier between you and God. Because of it there is no relationship between you and God. If God can somehow take your sin from you then there is no barrier anymore - you are "saved from your sin". But God must put the sin somewhere to be dealt with justly (that is: your sin must be punished no matter what). So, after taking it from you he gives it to Jesus, and Jesus accepts it.Caught in possession of your sin (so to speak) Jesus is punished instead of you. The alternative (if you are not saved) is that you are caught in possession of your sin and are punished for it yourself.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Er...Romans.