Chapter 6: A full reply to the twentieth chapter of The Universality of God's Free Grace, which gath

Chapter 6: A full reply to the twentieth chapter of The Universality of God's Free Grace, which gath

Book IV, Chapter 6 An answer to the twentieth chapter of the book entitled, "The Universality of God's

Free Grace," etc., being a collection of all the arguments used by the author throughout the whole book to prove the universality of redemption.

Responding to the First Argument for Universal Redemption Does the Bible Teach That Christ Died for Every Individual?

Thomas More begins his summary of arguments for universal redemption by appealing to what he calls "plain Scripture." His reasoning is as follows:

1. What Scripture plainly and often teaches in clear words is certainly true and must be believed.

2. Scripture often and plainly teaches that Christ died for every man (as he claims was shown in chapters 7–13 of his book).

3. Therefore, the belief that Christ died for every man is certainly true and should be embraced.

Let's walk through this argument step by step.

1. The First Premise: "What Scripture Plainly Teaches Is True"

This is absolutely right—with one important clarification. When we say the Bible teaches something "plainly," we must always seek the true meaning of the words, not just their surface form. That is, we interpret Scripture by:

Paying attention to context Comparing Scripture with Scripture Understanding figures of speech, literary forms, and how language works It's not enough to lift a phrase like "every man" off the page and assume it means "every person who has ever lived." Scripture itself shows that such expressions often carry more nuance.

If we ignore this and insist on the most literal and surface-level reading of all biblical phrases, we'll fall into serious error—like the old heresy that says God has a human body, just because the Bible mentions His "eyes" and "hands." Or we'll end up accepting the Roman Catholic error of transubstantiation, just because Jesus said,

"This is my body."

So yes, we must believe what Scripture teaches. But we must seek to understand what it actually means.

2. The Second Premise: "Scripture Teaches That Christ Died for Every Man"

Here is where we disagree—strongly.

It is simply not true that the Bible "plainly and often" teaches that Jesus died for every individual. The phrase that Christ "tasted death for every man" occurs only once, in Hebrews 2:9, and even that phrase is open to careful interpretation.

Let's look more closely at it:

"By the grace of God He might taste death for every man."

(Heb. 2:9) Three Key Observations:

1. The phrase "every man" does not always mean "every single person."

In Colossians 1:28, Paul says, "We warn every man"—but obviously, Paul did not personally warn every individual in the world.

So the term often means "every kind of person," or "everyone within a particular group."

2. The Greek text of Hebrews 2:9 doesn't say "every man."

It simply says "for every" (Greek: huper pantos), with no noun. Translators supply "man," but it could just as easily mean "every believer" or "every child of God."

3. The context limits "every" to those Christ brings to glory.

Verse 10 speaks of "bringing many sons to glory."

Verses 11 and 13 describe these people as Christ's "brethren," and "the children God has given him."

These are the elect—the redeemed. Not all people.

So, to claim that this verse proves Christ died for all people is simply not honest with the text. It proves that Christ truly died for all those

He came to save—but says nothing about the reprobate, the unbelieving, or those who perish.

3. The Conclusion: Does This Prove Universal Redemption?

No, it does not. In fact, More seems aware that his syllogism (logical argument) is weak. So he tries to add extra proof texts after the conclusion to make it stronger.

This is poor reasoning. A conclusion should stand on the strength of its premises. If you have to add unrelated verses to support your conclusion, it usually means your logic is broken.

It's like trying to patch a sinking boat with wet paper.

Final Thoughts Thomas More's first "reason" for universal redemption fails in several ways:

He misuses the principle of plain Scripture by ignoring context and sound interpretation.

He assumes that "every man" must mean "every individual," despite evidence to the contrary.

He relies on one passage (Hebrews 2:9) and misunderstands it.

He then adds verses that have no connection to the argument in order to bolster a weak conclusion.

This is not how Scripture teaches us to think. Let every Christian strive to be "a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15).

Response to the Second Argument for Universal Redemption Does the Bible Say Christ Died for "All Men"?

Thomas More's second argument goes something like this:

1. Christ and His apostles clearly and plainly teach that Jesus came to save, died for, and is a propitiation for sinners, the world, the unjust, the ungodly, and for all men—without any qualification or restriction.

2. Therefore, Christ died for all men, without exception, and is the propitiation for their sins.

Let's walk carefully through this.

1. Interpreting "All" in Light of Scripture It's essential to say up front: We do not deny that the Bible says

Christ died for "sinners," "the world," "the ungodly," and "all." We affirm those passages wholeheartedly.

What we do deny is that these words—like "all" or "world"—must always mean every individual in the human race without exception.

Scripture doesn't use those words that way, and this is the fatal flaw in More's argument.

Let me illustrate: in one place, the Bible says Jesus died for "all." In another place, it tells us who the "all" are—His "church" (Eph. 5:25),

His "people" (Matt. 1:21), His "sheep" (John 10:15), His "elect" (Rom.

8:33). That's not contradicting the first passage—it's explaining it.

One Scripture interprets another. This is how we discover the true meaning of these texts.

So we're not saying one part of Scripture cancels out another. We're saying: One passage helps clarify another.

2. A Closer Look at the Scriptures Quoted More gives a long list of verses. But when we examine them, we find that not one of them actually proves what he wants them to prove— that Christ died for all people without exception.

Let's consider a few of the texts he references:

1 Timothy 1:15 says Christ came into the world to save sinners.

That's true—and praise God He did! But it doesn't say He died for every sinner without exception. It's an indefinite statement, not a universal one.

Romans 5:6 says He died for the ungodly. Amen—but again, not every ungodly person, as if His death had saving intent toward all equally.

1 Peter 3:18 says Christ suffered "the just for the unjust."

Again, general, not universal.

Hebrews 2:9 speaks of Christ tasting death "for every" (Greek: huper pantos). But we've already shown that "every" in that context refers to every one of His brothers—those He brings to glory (Heb. 2:10), not every human being who has ever lived.

1 John 2:2, which says Christ is the "propitiation for the sins of the whole world," we have already explained to refer to all His people throughout the world, Jews and Gentiles alike—not to every individual indiscriminately.

As for Romans 3:10, 19–23, Ephesians 2:1–3, and Titus 3:3, those only prove that all are sinners—which we gladly affirm.

But they say nothing about Christ dying for all sinners.

So we say to our friend: you've listed many verses, but none of them clearly teaches what you claim. You've confused indefinite language for universal declarations.

3. The Core Error: Turning "Some" into "All"

This is the heart of the mistake. The argument assumes that because Scripture says Christ died for "sinners," or "the ungodly," or "the world," then He must have died for every sinner, every ungodly person, and everyone in the world.

But that's not how language works. Consider the following:

Romans 4:5 says God "justifies the ungodly." Would you say, then, that every ungodly person is justified? Of course not.

John 1:10 says, "The world knew him not." Does that mean no one at all knew Him? No—His disciples certainly did.

1 John 5:19 says "the whole world lies in wickedness." Does that mean every person in the world is wicked? That would contradict the previous verse, where believers are called "of God."

Just because a word like "world" or "all" is used doesn't mean it includes every single person. It often means all kinds of people

—from every nation, tribe, and tongue—or all within a certain group (e.g., all believers, all who trust in Christ, all the elect).

4. Summary of the Flaws Let's sum up what's wrong with this argument:

It treats general statements as universal promises.

It ignores the interpretive principle that Scripture interprets Scripture.

It offers a long list of verses that either don't apply or say nothing about universal atonement.

It assumes what it needs to prove—namely, that "all" always means "every individual without exception."

Final Word Yes, Christ died for sinners. Yes, He died for the ungodly. Yes, He is the Savior of the world.

But He is not the Savior of all without exception—He is the Savior of all without distinction. His atonement is not scattered broadly and ineffectually. It is particular, powerful, and purposeful— accomplishing exactly what the Father gave Him to do: to save His people from their sins (Matt. 1:21).

Answer to the Third Argument for Universal Redemption Does Christ's Universal Lordship Prove He Died for All?

Thomas More's third argument goes something like this:

1. The Bible teaches that one of the purposes of Christ's death and resurrection was to make Him the Lord and Judge of all.

2. Therefore, Christ must have died for all people.

This might sound impressive at first, but it falls apart upon closer inspection. Let's walk through it step by step.

1. Confusion in the Form of the Argument Let's begin with the logic of the argument itself. Unfortunately, it is deeply flawed. The structure is confused, and the terms are mixed together in a way that makes the whole thing hard to follow. For example:

The major premise talks about the exaltation of Christ—His being made Lord and Judge of all.

But the conclusion suddenly jumps to His dying for all—which is a completely different topic.

This is not just a small oversight. It's a fundamental error. It's as if someone started an argument about the king's authority to rule and then concluded that he therefore must love every citizen equally. It simply doesn't follow.

2. Being Judge of All Does Not Mean He Died for All The core idea is this: Because Jesus is Lord and Judge of all, He must have died for all. But that just doesn't make sense.

Think about it:

Christ is also Lord over angels, and He will judge them (2 Pet.

2:4; Jude 6). But no one would argue that Christ died for angels.

Christ is Lord over the entire human race, including those who never hear the gospel. But are we to say He died for those who perish without ever knowing Him?

The office of Judge is about authority, not atonement. Christ's right to judge the world flows from His obedience, death, and resurrection (cf. Rom. 14:9; Phil. 2:9–11). But that does not mean

His death was intended to redeem every person over whom He rules.

This distinction is crucial. Jesus has universal authority over all creation, but His atoning work is applied only to His people—His sheep, His church, His elect (Matt. 1:21; John 10:11, 15; Eph. 5:25).

3. Romans 14:9 and the Misuse of Dominion Texts More heavily leans on Romans 14:9: "For to this end Christ died and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living."

Yes, the verse teaches that Christ's death and resurrection brought Him into the full exercise of His sovereign dominion. But here's what it does not say: that He died to redeem all the dead and living.

There is a vast difference between attaining dominion and atoning for sin.

In context, Paul is urging believers to walk in love and not judge one another, because Christ is Lord over all and we will all appear before

His judgment seat (Rom. 14:10–12). Paul is saying: Live like people who will give an account to the Lord. He is not saying: Christ died to redeem every person. That idea is read into the text, not drawn from it.

4. A False Conclusion from a Misunderstood Premise Let's say it plainly: Just because Christ is exalted as Lord over all does not mean He died for all in a saving way.

Otherwise, you'd have to affirm things like:

Christ died for those who never hear the gospel and perish in ignorance (Rom. 2:12).

Christ died for the reprobate, whom God eternally passed over and left to their sins.

Christ died for the devils—because He will also judge them.

None of these are true. Yet they follow logically if we accept the argument that Christ's death must be as wide as His dominion. But dominion and redemption are two different things.

5. The Real Meaning of Christ's Death Scripture is clear: Christ died to save His people from their sins

(Matt. 1:21), to give His life for His sheep (John 10:15), and to redeem His bride, the church (Eph. 5:25). These are the ones for whom He intercedes, for whom He bore wrath, for whom He accomplished redemption.

His death was not general and indefinite, hoping for some fruit.

It was specific and effectual, accomplishing all that the Father gave Him to do.

Conclusion This third argument rests on a basic confusion between Christ's universal authority and His particular redemption. His kingship over all does not imply a death for all.

To say Christ died for all simply because He will judge all is to confuse His office as universal King with His work as Redeemer of the elect.

So we reject this argument. Not because we question Christ's lordship—God forbid! But because we dare not diminish the glory of His atoning work by making it common and ineffectual. His blood is not wasted on those who will never be saved. He did not suffer for those He will righteously condemn.

Response to Argument IV "Christ Died for All, Because the Gospel Invitation Is for All"

The argument is this:

1. Whatever the Bible teaches as a truth for all people—that if anyone believes in Christ, they will have eternal life—must

certainly be believed.

2. The Bible teaches that God sent His Son to be the Savior of the world, and that whoever believes in Him will be saved

(John 3:16–18).

3. Therefore, Christ was sent to be the Savior of all people.

Now, at first glance, this sounds right. But here's where the problem lies.

1. The Obvious: Christ Is Sufficient for All Yes, it's true that whoever believes in Christ will be saved. That's a glorious gospel truth! The death of Christ is of infinite value. It is sufficient to save any sinner who comes to Him in faith. And yes,

God's Word does offer this promise to everyone who hears the gospel.

But here's what does not follow: that because salvation is offered to all, Christ intended His death to save all.

The universal call of the gospel is not proof of a universal atonement. Christ's death is proclaimed to all, but it was offered in purpose for His elect alone. The gospel invitation flows not from a general intent to save all, but from the sovereign command of God to proclaim salvation to every nation, tribe, and tongue (Matt. 28:19;

Acts 17:30).

2. The Word "World" Does Not Mean "Every Individual"

The text most often quoted here is John 3:16. But as we've seen earlier, "God so loved the world" does not mean "every individual who has ever lived." It means God's love is no longer limited to the Jewish people, but is extended to people from every nation. Christ is the Savior of all kinds of people, not every single person.

So yes, whoever believes shall not perish. But the verse doesn't say that Christ died for every person—only that salvation is promised to all who believe. And who are those who believe? The ones the Father has given to the Son (John 6:37).

3. The Real Takeaway What this argument actually proves is that the death of Christ is sufficient to save anyone who believes. It's a real, true, and free offer of life to every sinner who comes to Christ. But it doesn't prove that Christ intended to die for everyone.

His death was sufficient for all, but efficient only for those who believe—and those who believe do so because they were chosen by God and given to the Son (John 17:2, 9).

So, we agree with the conclusion in its correct form: that Christ is the Savior of the world, meaning people from all nations; and that all who believe will be saved. But this says nothing about the scope of the atonement.

Response to Argument V

"Every Tongue Will Confess Jesus Is Lord —Therefore, He Died for All?"

The next argument runs like this:

1. Whatever God causes everyone to confess must be true, because God never glorifies lies.

2. The Bible says every person will one day confess that Jesus is Lord.

3. Therefore, Jesus must have died for all, and has the right of Lordship over all—even over those who reject Him.

Let's address this carefully.

1. Lordship Does Not Mean Redemption It is certainly true that Jesus is Lord of all (Phil. 2:10–11). And yes, every knee will bow—even unbelievers will one day be forced to confess His Lordship.

But here's what's false: that Christ must have died for every person just because He is Lord over every person.

The Lordship of Christ includes both Savior and Judge (Acts 10:42; 2 Tim. 4:1). He is not only Lord of His sheep—He is Lord over the wolves too. Being Lord over all does not mean He shed His blood for all. As we've said before, Jesus is also Lord over angels and demons, yet He did not die for them.

So yes, all people will one day confess that Jesus is Lord. But this proves His authority, not the intent of His atonement.

2. Where the Argument Fails The argument smuggles in a false premise: that the death of Christ is the reason He is Lord of all. But that's not what the Bible says. In Philippians 2, Paul says that Christ's humiliation—His obedience unto death—is the reason for His exaltation.

That's different from saying He died for all. It simply means He obeyed the Father perfectly, and because of that, God has exalted

Him above all (Phil. 2:9).

So while it's true that Christ is Lord over all and will judge all, it does not follow that He died for all. If it did, we'd have to say He died for Satan and the fallen angels too—because He will judge them also.

3. A Final Word of Clarity Let's be clear:

Christ died for His people, His sheep, His elect (John 10:15; Matt. 1:21).

Christ rules over all, even those who reject Him.

Every person will confess His Lordship—either as a willing worshiper or as a condemned rebel.

So while this argument proves the authority of Christ, it says nothing about the design or extent of His atonement.

Response to Argument VI "Christ Gave Himself for All—Proved by Plain Scripture"

Argument Summary:

1. Whatever the Bible teaches directly or can be rightly concluded from it is true and should be believed.

2. The Bible teaches that Christ gave Himself for all men and tasted death for every man.

3. Therefore, this must be a truth to be believed.

Let's deal with this step by step.

1. Yes, Scripture Is the Standard of Truth We fully agree with the first premise. God's Word is true. Any doctrine that is plainly taught or rightly inferred from Scripture must be believed. We gladly stand with the psalmist who says, "The words of the Lord are pure words" (Ps. 12:6).

But the key is this: the meaning of the words—not just the words themselves—must be rightly understood. That's why Paul says we must "rightly divide the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). If someone quotes a verse but twists the meaning—by ignoring context or misapplying words—then they haven't upheld truth, even if they quote Scripture word-for-word.

So yes, we affirm that what Scripture says plainly, or implies by sound reasoning, must be received. But it must be rightly interpreted.

2. Yes, Christ Gave Himself "for All"—But Who Are the "All"?

The second point claims that Christ gave Himself as a ransom for all, and tasted death for every man. Again, we don't deny the words.

That's not the question.

The question is: who does "all" refer to? That is where our disagreement lies.

Does "all" mean every single individual who ever lived—elect and reprobate, believers and unbelievers alike? Or does it mean all kinds of people, from every nation, tribe, and tongue—those given to Christ by the Father?

When Scripture uses the word all, it often refers to all within a group —not every individual in the world. Paul said he preached to "every man" (Col. 1:28), but clearly, he didn't mean every human on the planet. He meant all types, wherever he went.

So we affirm that Christ gave Himself for "all"—but the "all" refers to His elect (John 10:11), the church (Eph. 5:25), those given to Him by the Father (John 6:37–39), not every single person ever born.

3. What's Actually Being Argued?

Let's be clear: the real assertion being pushed here is not just that Scripture uses the word "all." The real claim is this:

"Christ died to redeem every human being—elect and reprobate, saved and damned—and intended to bring salvation to all equally."

That is the claim we reject, because Scripture does not teach it—not in plain words, and not by any necessary consequence.

The Bible never says Christ died for Judas in the same way He died for Peter, or for Pharaoh in the same way He died for Moses. His blood was poured out for His people, not for all people without exception (Matt. 1:21).

Now, Let's Consider the First "Proof" of Argument VI Scripture Cited:

John 3:16–17 – God so loved the world.

1 John 4:14 – Christ the Savior of the world.

John 1:4, 7 – Light that gives life to all.

1 Tim. 2:4; 1 Tim. 1:15 – God desires all to be saved.

Proverbs 1:23, 8:4–5 – A general call to wisdom.

Does This Prove That Christ Died for Everyone?

No, and here's why:

(1) "World" Doesn't Always Mean Everyone Without Exception When the Bible says Christ is the "Savior of the world," it doesn't mean every individual will be saved—or that He even died for all.

It means He's the Savior of people from all nations, not just the Jews.

The word "world" in John 3:16 refers to the world in contrast to Israel. God's love is not confined to one nation, but reaches across boundaries—to Gentiles as well. That's the marvel of it!

And remember, the same passage says that whoever believes in Him will be saved—not that all will believe or be saved. God's saving love is effective only for those who believe—and those who believe are those the Father gives to the Son (John 6:37, 44).

(2) God's "Desire" for All to Be Saved (1 Tim. 2:4) Yes, God "desires all people to be saved." But again, who are the "all"?

Paul is urging prayer for all kinds of people—including rulers and kings (1 Tim. 2:1–2). In that context, "all" means all types, not every

individual. The gospel isn't restricted to Jews or the poor or the oppressed—it's for kings and servants, men and women,

Greeks and barbarians.

And even if one were to argue that God desires the salvation of all in some sense, we must distinguish between God's revealed will

(what He commands) and His secret will (what He decrees). Just as He commands all not to sin—yet ordains that sin occurs—He may call all to repent, yet intend to save only some.

(3) The Call of Wisdom (Prov. 1 & 8) Proverbs speaks of wisdom crying out in the streets, offering truth to all. But this is a general call—not a promise that every hearer is intended to be saved.

Christ's call is real. It reaches many. But His saving grace reaches only the elect.

Refuting the First "Proof" of Universal Redemption from Argument VI (Re: Christ dying for "all" and "the world")

Let's recall what the claim is:

Christ's death is for all because the Bible says He is the "Savior of the world," and that God desires all to be saved.

Let's examine this proof carefully and biblically.

1. The Real Issue Is Not the Words "All" or "World" – It's What They Mean The burden of proof is on our opponents to show that when Scripture speaks of "all" or "the world" in relation to Christ's death, it means every single person who has ever lived, without exception. Unless they can demonstrate this, all other efforts are futile.

But the texts they cite don't prove this claim. Instead, they assume the meaning of "all" without proving it. That's a critical misstep.

2. What Does It Mean That Christ Is the "Savior of the World"?

(1 John 4:14) Yes, Christ is called the "Savior of the world." But what does that mean?

It means He is the Savior of people living in the world— specifically, His elect, drawn from every nation under heaven. That is, He is not the Savior of the Jews only, but of Gentiles also. In this way, "world" contrasts not with "some," but with "one group or nation."

This interpretation fits perfectly with the rest of Scripture. Nowhere does the Bible say Christ saves everyone in the world. In fact, it explicitly says the opposite: "You will call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins" (Matt. 1:21).

3. John 1:4, 7 – Does "All Through Him Might Believe" Mean Christ Died for All?

This verse is often misunderstood.

"There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to bear witness about the Light, that all might believe through him" (John 1:6–7).

At first glance, some think this means Christ was sent so that everyone in the world would believe through Him. But the grammar and context make it clear: the "him" in "through him" refers to John, not Jesus. John was the instrument—a witness—so that people might believe in Jesus through his (John's) preaching.

This is confirmed by the Syriac translation, and the way the New Testament speaks elsewhere. We never read of people believing through Christ, but always in Him. But people do believe through the witness of others (e.g., Acts 8:35, Rom. 10:14–17).

And as for the phrase "all might believe," are we really to suppose that refers to every individual on earth? John preached only in a small region of Judea, for a short time. Clearly "all" here must mean all types of people who heard his voice—not every person who ever lived.

4. John 3:16–17 – Does "World" Mean Everyone?

"God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life."

We affirm this glorious truth wholeheartedly. But it says nothing about Christ dying for all without exception. It says God loved the world, and that whoever believes will be saved.

Again, the "world" here does not mean "every individual," but humanity in general—not just the Jews. The purpose is not to describe the scope of Christ's atonement in terms of individuals, but in terms of nations and peoples.

5. 1 Timothy 2:4 – God Desires "All" to Be Saved?

This passage is often misunderstood:

"[God] desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Let's ask: What kind of "will" is this? Is it God's eternal decree?

His sovereign plan? Clearly not—because not all are saved. So what kind of will is this?

If it's a will that fails in the end, then God is frustrated, and His will is weak. But "who has resisted His will?" (Rom. 9:19).

The better interpretation is this: "all people" means all kinds of people. That's the context. Paul had just told Timothy to pray for "kings and all in high positions" (v. 2)—people whom the Jews thought were outside God's saving purposes. Paul is saying: Pray for all kinds of people, because God saves all kinds of people.

This agrees with other verses: "I will draw all to myself" (John 12:32) —that is, Jews and Gentiles, not every person universally.

6. The Pelagian Sting in the Tail Finally, the argument concludes with this troubling statement:

"God will not be lacking in sufficiency of help, if people allow themselves to be worked on and receive the light."

This is nothing less than free-will theology, dressed in pious language. It suggests that salvation hinges not on grace, but on man's cooperation—on whether someone "allows" themselves to be persuaded.

This is the very heart of Pelagianism and Arminianism—that man can respond to grace apart from the Spirit's regenerating power.

It's foreign to the gospel, which teaches that we are dead in sin and must be born again by God's sovereign mercy (Eph. 2:1–5; John

3:3).

It's also alien to the doctrine of particular redemption, which says that Christ didn't make salvation merely possible—He actually accomplished it for His people.

Words like "all" and "world" must be interpreted in context.

"World" usually means "nations" or "people in general," not every individual.

"All" often means "all kinds" or "all those to whom the message came."

God's desire for salvation is not frustrated—He saves all whom He has chosen.

The suggestion that grace becomes effective only if people "receive it" is a dangerous distortion of the gospel.

Let us then magnify the grace of God, not human will. Let us confess that:

"Salvation belongs to the Lord" (Ps. 3:8), and that Christ has "obtained eternal redemption" (Heb. 9:12) for all whom the Father gave Him (John 6:37–39).

Proof 2 (Arminian Claim):

"Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came into the world to save the world (John 12:47); to save sinners (1 Tim. 1:15); to take away our sins and destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:5, 8); to take away the sins of the world (John 1:29); and therefore died for all (2 Cor. 5:14–15); and gave himself as a ransom for all (1

Tim. 2:6); to save the lost (Matt. 18:11). His propitiation was made for the world (2 Cor. 5:19), indeed the whole world (1 John

2:2). And all of this is plainly and fully taught in Scripture."

Answer:

Most of the verses cited in this so-called "proof" have already been addressed—particularly those involving the words "all" or "world":

John 12:47; John 1:29; 2 Cor. 5:14–15; 1 Tim. 2:6; 2 Cor.

5:19; 1 John 2:2.

We've already shown that these do not support the Arminian claim of universal redemption—in fact, properly interpreted, they refute it. I

won't weary the reader with repetition.

As for the other verses cited—1 Tim. 1:16; Matt. 18:11; 1 John 3:5, 8—I can't see how they offer any legitimate support for the doctrine of universal atonement. If anything, they reinforce the particularity of Christ's redemptive work. So we'll move on.

Proof 3 (Arminian Claim):

"God, in Christ, gives some witness of his mercy and goodness— purchased by Christ—to all men, by one means or another (Ps.

19:4; Rom. 10:18; Acts 14:17). And through that witness, at some point, he stirs the hearts of all people by his Spirit, prompting them to repent and seek him, offering grace and salvation. And he does this sincerely, not merely in appearance, but with true goodwill, ready to bestow it upon them. All of this is confirmed in Scripture (Gen. 6:3; Isa. 45:22; Acts 17:30–31; John 1:19)."

Answer:

If the doctrine of universal redemption requires this kind of evidence to support it, it's clear it stands on very shaky ground indeed.

This argument introduces universal vocation—that is, the idea that God calls every person equally to salvation—as if this could somehow establish universal redemption. But it's simply free-will theology in disguise, a clever strategy where one weak doctrine props up another.

Let's address it plainly.

First:

It's true that, since the creation of the world, God has testified to all men about himself through creation—his eternal power and divine nature (Rom. 1:19–20; Ps. 19:1–2; Acts 14:17). But this is a testimony to God as Creator, not Christ as Redeemer.

Second:

After Christ's death and resurrection, the gospel was to be preached more widely—no longer just to Israel, but to the nations. The command to preach to "every creature" (Mark 16:15) was a means to call God's elect, scattered throughout the world (Rom. 10:18; Isa.

45:22; Acts 17:30–31).

Third:

But to say that God, at all times and in all places, gives everyone the means of grace—offering salvation through Christ to all people equally, accompanied by the inner stirrings of the Spirit

—is not only utterly without biblical foundation, but also directly contradicts Scripture, historic experience, and the very doctrine of election.

It defies God's distinguishing mercy. It assumes the same striving of the Spirit with every individual, regardless of whether they ever hear the gospel—something that Scripture never teaches.

It is astounding that anyone would dare to assert such a thing—let alone present it as biblical proof.

Let the reader simply consider the plain witness of these verses, which speak directly to the matter:

Psalm 147:19–20; Matt. 11:25; Matt. 22:14; Acts 14:16; Acts 16:7; Rom. 10:14–15.

These texts demolish the notion of universal gospel grace or divine striving.

And with that, we move on.

Proof 4 (Arminian Claim):

"The Holy Spirit, who comes from the Father and the Son, will convict the world of sin—specifically those in the world who currently refuse to admit they are under sin—because they do not believe in Christ. And how could it be their sin not to believe in Christ, and be judged for that sin, if there was not enough in Christ's atonement for them, nor any sincerity in God's offer of mercy to them, nor any will or power from the Spirit sufficient to enable them to believe at some point? Yet Scripture clearly says that their unbelief will be their great sin, the one that seals their condemnation (citing John 3:18–19; 8:24; 12:48; 15:22, 24;

16:7–11)."

Answer:

The argument here tries to prove that unbelief is a damning sin— and then concludes that this must mean Christ died for all. But let's break this down carefully.

The author says that for unbelief to be sinful, three things must be true:

1. Christ's atonement must have been made for them.

2. God's offer of mercy to them must be truthful.

3. The Spirit must have given them enough power and will to believe.

Let's take these one at a time.

1. "There must be enough in the atonement for them"

If you mean that Christ's atonement had sufficient worth, that it could have saved them if they believed—then yes, we agree.

Christ's death is of infinite value. But if you mean that the atonement was actually made for them—that Christ intended to bear their sins and save them—then no, we deny it. There is no atonement for those who perish in unbelief.

2. "There must be truth in God's offer of mercy to them"

Certainly, everything God says is true. If we understand the gospel call as an offer to all who hear, inviting them to believe and be saved, we affirm that God will absolutely give eternal life to everyone who comes to Christ in faith. That's a true promise.

But this gospel call doesn't tell us whom God intends to save. The command to believe, with the attached promise, shows our duty and God's general rule—not his secret decree. As Paul asks, "Who has known the mind of the Lord?"

3. "There must be will and power from the Spirit to believe"

This is confused. First, it puts the "will" before the "power," which is backward—man must first be made able. Second, we deny that a man must receive internal grace to be held accountable for rejecting

Christ. Simply having the gospel preached to him is enough to make him guilty, even if he lacks both power and will to believe (which he does, by nature).

And third, to claim that someone can be given a will to believe and yet still remain in unbelief is absurd. If God gives the will to believe, a man will believe (cf. John 6:37, 44).

Now, just to expose how weak this reasoning is, let's simplify the logic of the argument:

"If the Holy Spirit convicts those who hear the gospel of sin— especially for their unbelief—then Christ died for all people, including those who never hear the gospel."

But how does that follow? That's like saying: "If the sun shines on a tree, then the roots of every tree everywhere are nourished by it." It's a non sequitur.

The Scriptures cited—John 3:18–19; 8:24; 12:48; 15:22, 24—teach clearly that unbelief is a condemning sin. But only in those who have the gospel preached to them. That doesn't tell us anything about whether Christ died for all.

A Closer Look at John 16:7–11

This passage is used often, and badly. Let's look at what Jesus actually says:

"I will send the Comforter. And when He comes, He will convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment…"

What does this mean?

Jesus is comforting his disciples, telling them that although he is going away, he will send the Holy Spirit.

The Spirit is called the "Advocate" or "Counselor"—one who pleads and testifies (cf. 1 John 2:1).

The Spirit's work in this passage is focused on vindicating Jesus in the face of the world's rejection of him.

Here's the breakdown:

Of sin, because they did not believe in Christ. This was fulfilled at Pentecost (Acts 2), when Peter's preaching cut to the heart of those who had rejected Christ.

Of righteousness, because Jesus went to the Father—showing that he was truly righteous, not a blasphemer.

Of judgment, because Satan, the "prince of this world," has been judged. Christ's death was his defeat.

This passage primarily refers to the Spirit's work through the apostles' witness—beginning at Pentecost. It does not teach that the Spirit convicts every person in the world of sin. It says nothing about universal redemption.

So what does this have to do with the claim that Christ died for all people, elect and reprobate alike? Nothing. If someone thinks it does, let him try to prove it—he'll have a hard time.

Arminian Proof 5 (Claim):

"God has testified, both by His word and by His oath, that He desires His Son to save the world—meaning that He has purposed redemption for all people. He also desires that all should come to the knowledge of the truth so that this redemption might take effect in them. This is shown in 1

Timothy 2:4 and John 3:17. Additionally, God says that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn and live (Ezek. 18:23, 32; 33:11). And who would dare say that God would testify to something—by oath no less—without sincerely meaning it? Surely, that would be blasphemy!"

Response:

Let's examine this carefully and biblically.

1. "God testified, by His word and oath, that He wills His Son to save all by working redemption for all."

This is a serious and unfounded claim. It is a false appeal to God's testimony. God never declared such a thing—neither by word nor oath. What He has clearly revealed is that His will is for Christ to save to the uttermost all who come to Him (Heb. 7:25)—not to work a redemption that merely makes salvation possible for all.

Scripture never speaks of Christ redeeming "so far" or "to a point."

That is a human fiction, not a divine promise.

Beware of claiming divine testimony for what God has never said.

God will not be a witness to lies.

2. "God wills that Christ should bring all to a knowledge of the truth so redemption may be wrought in them."

Again, this is a gross distortion of Scripture. God never said that Christ's mission was to bring every individual to the knowledge of the truth with the aim of applying redemption to them all. This is both presumptuous and deceitful.

3. What do the cited Scriptures actually say?

Let's examine the verses:

John 3:17 – "God sent His Son into the world… that the world through Him might be saved."

This verse says nothing about a partial or potential redemption for every single person. The word world here, as often in Scripture, refers to the elect scattered among all nations, not every individual without exception. The goal is not a hypothetical salvation but actual salvation—"He shall save His people from their sins" (Matt. 1:21).

1 Timothy 2:4 – God "desires all to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth."

As shown earlier, this verse refers to all kinds of people—not every individual. Paul is urging prayer for kings and rulers (v. 1–

2), showing that God's mercy is not limited to Jews or the lowly, but includes the high and mighty too.

Ezekiel 18:23, 32; 33:11 – "Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked? … Turn and live."

These verses are not speaking of Christ's redemption at all.

There is no mention of the Messiah or His atonement. Rather, they are about God's temporal judgments upon the house of Israel for their sins.

Let's be clear about this.

What is Ezekiel actually about?

Let's observe what the prophet is saying in context.

First, these words are spoken only to the house of Israel (see Ezek. 18:25). They are not general statements to all humanity. God had entered into covenant with Israel. He sent prophets to them. He pleaded with them to turn from their wicked ways. These verses speak to God's dealings with His covenant people, not with all nations.

Second, when God says He has "no pleasure in the death of the wicked," we must understand this carefully. Either:

God is saying He has decreed they shall not die—which cannot be true, because many do die in their sins; or,

He is saying He has commanded them to repent, that they might live. And this is true.

The meaning is this: God takes no delight in judgment for its own sake. He is not bloodthirsty. He calls sinners—especially those in covenant with Him—to repent, and if they do, He will pardon. But this is a command and call, not a declaration of a universal saving purpose.

So what's the bottom line?

These verses from Ezekiel speak about Israel's national judgment, not eternal salvation.

They have no reference to Christ's death or atonement.

They are sometimes used to make it seem as if God has a universal saving intention toward all people. But this is a misuse of the text.

When someone takes these texts and uses them to build a case for "universal redemption," they are forcing them to say what God never intended. They twist the plain meaning of Scripture and then say, "Shall we accuse God of not meaning what He says?" But they are putting their own words in God's mouth, and then calling Him a liar if He doesn't mean what they say!

Such handling of God's Word is not just bad theology—it's dangerous.

Arminian Proof 6 (Claim):

"The very words and phrases used by the Holy Spirit in Scripture—when speaking of Christ's death, His ransom, and His atonement—clearly imply that it belongs to all people.

Consider the following expressions: 'All nations' (Matt. 28:19– 20), 'the ends of the earth' (Isa. 45:22; 49:6), 'every creature'

(Mark 16:15), 'all' (2 Cor. 5:14–15; 1 Tim. 2:6), 'every man'

(Heb. 2:9), 'the world' (John 3:16–17; 2 Cor. 5:19), 'the whole world' (1 John 2:2), 'that which was lost' (Luke 19:10), 'sinners'

(Matt. 9:13), 'unjust' (1 Pet. 3:18), 'ungodly' (Rom. 5:6). And the Bible also says that whoever among these repents and believes will be saved (John 3:16, 18; Acts 10:43). Are we not twisting the plain language of Scripture if we try to limit the scope of these passages?"

Response:

Let's answer this carefully and biblically.

1. This is not an argument, but an assumption.

The author here simply repeats the very point that's under debate—that is, whether words like all and world always refer to every single individual. That's the issue we're discussing. So to quote verses with those words and then conclude that they must mean

"everyone without exception" is to assume what he needs to prove. That's not an argument; it's just a repetition of a belief.

2. Verses about "sinners," "unjust," "ungodly," and "the lost" prove nothing about the scope of Christ's death.

Yes, Jesus came to save sinners (Matt. 9:13), the unjust (1 Pet.

3:18), the ungodly (Rom. 5:6), and the lost (Luke 19:10). But that does not mean He came to save every sinner, or that His death was equally intended for all. It means that only those in this category can be saved, and His elect are drawn from among them.

These verses describe the kind of people Christ saves, not the total number of those for whom He died.

3. The universal language ("all," "world," "every man") has been addressed already.

These expressions appear often in Scripture, but they do not necessarily mean all individuals without exception. They can (and often do) mean all kinds of people—Jews and Gentiles, rulers and servants, men and women—from every nation, not every person without exception.

We've shown already that context must determine how we understand these terms.

4. What about verses like Matthew 28:19 and Mark 16:15?

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations…"

"Preach the gospel to every creature…"

These are commands about the scope of gospel proclamation, not the intended extent of Christ's atonement.

First, these commands were never fulfilled universally.

Not every nation or individual has heard the gospel, even to this day.

Second, the command to preach to all does not imply that Christ died for all. The gospel is to be offered freely and indiscriminately, not because of the universal extent of the atonement, but because of its infinite sufficiency and God's purpose to call His elect from all nations (cf. John 10:16).

5. Isaiah 45:22 and 49:6 refer not to all people, but to the elect.

"Look to me, all the ends of the earth, and be saved" (Isa. 45:22) is a call to the Gentiles—yes—but only those who look are saved. And who are they? The ones whom God effectually draws to Himself.

Isaiah 49:6 says that Christ will be "a light to the Gentiles," and will bring salvation to the ends of the earth. But it also says in the same verse that He will gather the preserved of Israel

—that is, the elect remnant, not every Israelite.

So, far from proving that Christ died for all without exception, these verses actually support the idea that He died to redeem His elect from every nation.

6. Ironically, these verses undercut the very point they're being used to support.

When you consider the actual meaning of these texts—especially Isaiah 45 and 49—they make it clear that the universal language used in Scripture is qualified by the intention and effect of Christ's death. The death of Christ is saving in nature, and definite in its purpose. He "gave Himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness

and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession" (Titus 2:14)—not to make all people savable.

Final Thoughts:

The author of this "proof" accuses others of pride and error for not interpreting all and world as literal universals. But Scripture itself interprets those words differently. And if we impose a meaning on Scripture that it does not support—that is the real pride and error.

To take language about all nations, the world, and every creature and force it to mean every individual without exception is not only poor interpretation—it actually undermines the very glory of the atonement, which is not general and ineffectual, but particular, powerful, and saving.

Arminian Proof 7 (Claim):

"There are certain high and special blessings that come by the Holy Spirit through the New Covenant—things like saving knowledge, regeneration, sanctification, and communion with God—which clearly belong only to the saints, the called and chosen. This is clear from places like Matthew 13:11, John 14:17,

21–23; 16:13–15; 17:19–20; Acts 2:38–39; 1 Corinthians 2:9, 14; Hebrews 9:15; 1 Peter 2:9.

But even though these privileges are only for the saints, Scripture sometimes mentions them alongside references to Christ's death and ransom—which is said to be for all. And

when that happens, the language used doesn't restrict the ransom only to the elect, but instead leaves room to understand it as being for all people. After all, Scripture says Christ died for His sheep and for many—but never says only for His sheep or only for many. So this leaves the door open to say that His death was for all, even if only believers enjoy its saving effects."

Response:

The more I read this "proof," the less I can see what it's trying to establish. It's neither logically sound nor biblically persuasive—and it does nothing to support the idea of universal redemption.

Let's examine the reasoning behind it.

1. Of course, there are unique blessings that belong only to the elect—and Christ's death is one of them.

No Christian denies that the New Testament promises many special privileges—saving knowledge, the indwelling Spirit, eternal life—and that these are only for God's chosen people.

But the argument assumes a major error: it treats the saving benefits of Christ's death as distinct from the death itself.

In reality, His death and its benefits are inseparable—He did not shed His blood to make salvation merely possible, but to actually purchase and apply it to His elect.

As Scripture says:

"He redeemed His church with His own blood" (Acts 20:28) "He loved the church and gave Himself for her" (Eph. 5:25)

"He gave Himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness…"

(Titus 2:14) Even in John 17:19, Christ sanctifies Himself—sets Himself apart unto death—for the sake of those the Father gave Him.

So yes, these spiritual privileges are for the saints—and the ransom that purchased them is also for the same people, and no others.

2. The claim that some texts "leave room" for universal application is unproven.

The author says that when Scripture talks about the ransom alongside other spiritual blessings, it "leaves room" to apply the ransom to all people. But this is just asserted without proof.

We are told to believe that unless Scripture explicitly says, "Christ died only for His sheep," then maybe He died for others too. But this is not how Scripture works. The consistent teaching of God's Word is that Christ laid down His life for His sheep

(John 10:11), for His people (Matt. 1:21), and for His church (Eph. 5:25)—and never speaks of His atoning death for the reprobate.

This idea of "leaving room" is just a vague way of saying, "It doesn't explicitly exclude others, so maybe it includes them,"—but that's not how doctrine is built.

3. There is no difference in language between "many,"

"all," or "sheep" when describing the atonement.

The author implies that some phrases (like "many" or "His sheep") are exclusive, while others ("all" or "the world") are open-ended.

But that's simply not the case.

"Christ died for many" (Matt. 20:28) "He laid down His life for the sheep" (John 10:11)

"He gave Himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:6) All of these phrases must be interpreted in their context. None of them tells us exactly how wide the atonement extends. That must be learned by comparing Scripture with Scripture.

What we do see is this: when Christ's death is described as effectual —when it redeems, sanctifies, or saves—it is always tied to the elect, and never to the whole world without exception.

4. Christ's death and its saving benefits are always connected—and always limited to the redeemed.

Look at Revelation 5:9–10. There, Christ's blood is said to have purchased people from every tribe, language, people, and nation

—and made them kings and priests to God.

"You were slain, and by Your blood You ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation."

That's not a general ransom for everyone. That's a particular redemption for the elect from among all peoples. They are the ones Christ has redeemed—and they alone receive the inheritance.

This is the biblical pattern. The ransom is never broader than the redemption it achieves.

5. Finally, the "sheep and many" argument is empty.

The claim that Scripture never says "only for the sheep" or "only for many" is irrelevant.

When Jesus says He lays down His life for His sheep (John 10:11), He also says there are others who are not His sheep, and they do not believe (John 10:26).

In Matthew 20:28, He says He came to give His life a ransom for many, not for all—unless we redefine "many" to mean "all," which collapses the force of the distinction.

So it's simply false to claim that Scripture is vague on this point. In truth, the language used by the Holy Spirit is discriminating, purposeful, and limited in scope.

This so-called "proof" is built on shaky assumptions:

That Christ's death can be separated from its saving benefits.

That open-ended language means unlimited scope.

That the absence of "only" leaves the door open for universal atonement.

But the entire witness of Scripture teaches otherwise. Christ's death is definite in its design, effective in its result, and particular in its intent. He died to save His people, and He did not fail.

Arminian Proof 8 Claim: The restoration accomplished by Christ for humanity is as extensive and powerful as the fall of Adam. Thus, Adam is described as a figure of Christ, the second Adam (Romans 5; 1 Corinthians 15).

Answer:

First, it is certainly true that the apostle compares Adam and Christ in some of the cited texts, particularly in Romans 5:12, 18. But note carefully—the comparison concerns not the extent of their influence

(i.e., how many are affected), but the intensity and efficacy of their actions. The apostle's intent is to contrast the effectual power of Christ's righteousness in justification with the condemning power of Adam's sin. Just as Adam's transgression brought condemnation upon all his natural offspring, so Christ's righteousness brings the free gift of justification to all who are His—His spiritual offspring, those given to Him by the Father.

Secondly, 1 Corinthians 15:21–22 refers specifically to the resurrection, and only of believers. Although verse 22 says, "in Christ shall all be made alive," verse 23 immediately qualifies this: "each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ." The apostle is speaking not of the general resurrection, but the resurrection unto glory, which is the privilege of believers alone.

Thirdly, the comparison in verse 45 of that same chapter is about the kind of life each figure conveys. Adam was made a "living soul," possessing natural life which he passed on to his posterity. Christ, by contrast, is "a life-giving Spirit," who imparts spiritual life and grace to His people. Throughout Scripture, any parallel between Christ and Adam has a singular focus: they stand as two covenant heads or

representative roots. To those united to Adam by natural birth he communicates sin, guilt, and death; to those united to Christ by the Spirit, He communicates righteousness, peace, and eternal life. As for the number who receive these blessings, that is not the concern of the apostle's comparison.

Fourthly, while Romans 3:23 declares that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," the righteousness of Christ and the redemption He provides are explicitly said in verse 22 to belong "to all who believe." The gospel is universal in proclamation, not in effect. It reaches Jew and Gentile alike—without distinction—but only those who believe receive the benefits.

Arminian Proof 9 Claim: Christ commanded the gospel to be preached to all nations, and He promised salvation to all who believe and are baptised (Matt.

28:19–20; Mark 16:15–16). Therefore, His messengers must not have been sent with a lie when they offer salvation to all.

Answer:

The argument here lacks precision. Let us consider the facts.

First, it is true that Christ commanded His apostles to preach the gospel to every nation and to every person providentially brought under their ministry. They were to declare that "whoever believes shall be saved," without distinction of race, status, or nationality.

They were to go wherever the Spirit permitted them (cf. Acts 16:6–7), calling all to repentance and faith.

Secondly, the apostles did indeed obey this command, preaching far and wide, beseeching men to be reconciled to God (2 Cor. 5:19–20;

Rom. 10:18). They did not confine the message to the Jews but proclaimed it to all people wherever God opened a door. Of course,

Christ did not send His ambassadors with a falsehood. They did not offer what God never intended to give.

Yet from this, the conclusion that Christ died for all men without exception does not follow.

Some may argue: "If Christ did not die for all, how can we sincerely offer Him to all?" But consider:

1. The gospel was never preached to every single individual in the world, nor is this claimed in the cited texts. You must also account for those who never hear the gospel. Will you say Christ died for them too?

2. What do preachers offer when they proclaim the gospel? They offer life and salvation through Jesus Christ—on the condition of repentance and faith. The truthfulness of that offer does not rest on a secret knowledge of who the elect are, but on the promise that "whoever believes shall be saved."

3. The gospel offer is true because Christ is an all-sufficient Saviour. There is no defect in Him—He is able to save all who come to Him. Ministers are not charged with declaring God's secret purposes or eternal decrees, but with preaching His commands and promises.

To tell a man that "if you believe, you shall be saved" is no falsehood, even if the man refuses to believe and thus perishes. The promise

remains true, and the fault lies not in the offer, but in the unbelief of the hearer.

Proof 10: The Duty of Praying for All Men Claim:

Believers are commanded to pray for all men—even for the unjust and their persecutors (Matt. 5:44–48; Luke 6:28). The apostle instructs us to pray for "all men," including kings and those in authority (1 Tim. 2:1–4), at a time when few rulers favoured

Christianity. Since he does not say "some," but "all in authority," and because God "desires all to be saved," it follows that a door of life is opened to all. God does not tell His people to seek Him in vain (Isa.

45:19), nor would He have them pray for things in vain.

Answer:

The force of this argument rests on several flawed assumptions:

1. That general or indefinite statements must be interpreted as applying universally—a principle that is demonstrably false (see Romans 4–5).

2. That "all" in 1 Timothy 2:1 must mean every individual, not all kinds or classes of people. But the apostle explicitly enumerates various categories to clarify that he is referring to all sorts of men, not every man without exception.

3. That we are obliged to pray for the salvation of every individual—a notion that lacks:

Any scriptural command, rule, or example;

Is contrary to apostolic instruction (1 John 5:16); Opposes Christ's own example (John 17:9);

And conflicts with God's revealed purposes in election (Rom. 9:11–15; 11:7).

Scripture teaches us to pray for people of all types, not for every individual without exception, that those appointed to eternal life may come to faith.

4. That the only legitimate reason to pray for anyone is their potential salvation through Christ—which is plainly false. Jeremiah 29:7 instructs us to pray for the welfare of cities and peoples, even when their eternal state remains unknown or unrevealed.

5. That we must be assured Christ died for each person we pray for—a claim unsupported by Scripture. In Acts 8:22–

24, prayer is urged even without such certainty.

6. That our prayers must align with God's secret will and decree—as if we are bound to conform to the hidden counsel of God rather than to His revealed commands.

Unless every one of these assumptions is proven (which is highly improbable), the argument collapses. To reason from our duty to pray for all men to the conclusion that Christ died for all men is fallacious. Our duty flows from God's revealed will, not His secret purpose.

Proof 11: God's Presence with His People in Gospel Ministry Claim:

God promises to be with His people as they preach to all and pray for all, giving them confidence in both (Matt. 28:20; 1 Tim. 2:3, 8; Luke

10:5; Isa. 54:17).

Answer:

That God is present with His people in preaching and prayer, provided they act according to His will and their duty, is undoubtedly true. But this in no way supports the idea of a universal redemption.

To assert so is a non sequitur—an irrelevant leap from a general truth to an unfounded conclusion.

Proof 12: Mercy Shown to All Sorts of Sinners Claim:

God has already fulfilled His word by showing mercy to people from every kind of background and every type of sinner. This is meant to encourage all people to repent and believe, showing that none are excluded (Acts 2, 3, 8–11, 16, 19, 28; 1 Cor. 6:10–11; 1 Tim. 1:13–16).

Answer:

Had it been demonstrated that God saved every individual, your position would be secure. But instead, you affirm only that God has saved some from every kind of person and every class of sinner. This supports the contrary position: namely, that God saves a particular

number—His elect—from all nations, classes, and ranks, just as the Scriptures teach.

Thus, your assertion betrays your intended conclusion. You have proved not that Christ died for all without exception, but that God, through the blood of Christ, saves some from every group—which is precisely what your opponents maintain.

Proof 13: The Grace of God in the Atonement and the Salvation of the Elect Claim:

Life and blessing have flowed from the doctrine of God's love for mankind. In particular, the gracious and spiritual revelation of God's love—seen in the ransom given and atonement made by Christ for all men, and the blessings flowing from it—has, first and foremost, drawn God's elect to believe and turn to Him (cf. Acts 13:48; Titus

2:11–13; 3:4–5).

Answer:

We gladly and fully affirm that the free grace of God and the surpassing greatness of His eternal love—shown in sending His Son to die for sinners and to deliver them from the power of sin and Satan—is a powerful and effective motive in the conversion of the elect. When applied by the Spirit of grace, this truth becomes the very means by which God draws His people to Himself. It is the joy of our hearts, the foundation of our obedience, and the cause of our gratitude.

However, we categorically reject the idea that the efficacy of this truth lies in the claim that this love is extended universally to all

men. We deny that such a supposed universality has ever been the true source of its power. For:

1. It is false—a distortion of God's Word, as we have already shown. No lasting spiritual good can come from a falsehood.

2. It undermines the very power of this heavenly motive.

By turning the intense, particular love of God for His elect into a generalised wish or affection—a desire common to all but effectual for none—it strips the gospel of its effectual force. This sort of love, if true, could coexist with the eternal ruin of all humanity and would be entirely at odds with the very nature of God.

Now, regarding the Scriptures cited in support of this claim:

Titus 2:11–13 refers not to a common, ineffectual grace, but to the grace of God that actually brings salvation. It is the very grace that led Christ to redeem us from all iniquity and to purify for Himself a peculiar people, zealous for good works. Here, both redemption and sanctification are declared to be the immediate purpose of Christ's offering. That utterly opposes the idea of universal atonement.

Titus 3:4–5 speaks of the kindness and love of God as expressed in our regeneration by the Holy Spirit, justification, and adoption as heirs of eternal life (vv. 5–7). Can this be rightly described as a "common love"? Let all judge for themselves whether this is the universal benevolence of God toward all, or His effectual love toward the elect.

Acts 13:47 shows the expansion of God's mercy to the Gentiles through the preaching of the gospel—nothing more. It fulfils

Isaiah's prophecy (Isa. 49:6), which foretells the gathering of God's people from all nations. Far from supporting universal grace, this is the same truth stated in John 11:52: that Christ would gather into one the children of God who were scattered abroad. It is about the extent of the elect, not the reach of a generalised love.

As for Acts 13:48, it plainly affirms the contrary of universal redemption: "As many as were ordained to eternal life believed."

This is as clear a statement of particular grace as one could desire.

Proof 14: On the Rejection of the Gospel and the Supposed Universal Atonement Claim:

When the gospel is preached and spiritual light comes, those who refuse to believe and turn aside to other things are said to "love darkness rather than light" (John 3:19). They follow lies, forsake their own mercies (Jonah 2:8), harden their hearts (Rom. 2:5), lose their souls (Matt. 16:26), and destroy themselves (Hos. 13:9). But how could these things be true unless Christ had secured life, made atonement, and provided means for their restoration? Surely God does not demand from men what He has not provided—He is no hard master, gathering where He has not sown.

Answer:

The core of this argument is that because some reject the gospel and so perish by their own fault, therefore Christ must have died for all people without exception. Although such reasoning seems scarcely worth answering, for the sake of clarity and for those less grounded in the truth, I will offer a few observations.

1. The Gospel Is Not Universally Preached Not all people hear the gospel. In fact, throughout history, most have been left without the outward means of grace (Rom. 2:14; Acts 14:16;

17:30). Therefore, any conclusion based on the universal offer of salvation fails if even one soul was not included in the redemptive purpose. Universal redemption cannot stand if the gospel is not universally administered.

2. The Cause of Condemnation It is not the failure to believe that Christ died for every individual that condemns, for such belief is nowhere commanded in Scripture.

Rather, it is the refusal to believe in Christ's all-sufficient atonement, to embrace the mercy held forth in the gospel on God's terms. This has nothing to do with whether Christ intended to save each person, but concerns the sufficiency of His death for all who believe. He is the only true way, life, and light; there is no other name under heaven by which men may be saved.

The verse cited—John 3:19—says, "They loved darkness rather than light." The word "rather" (Greek: mallon) does not imply they loved both but preferred darkness more; it expresses opposition, not comparison. And though the passage speaks of men generally, the reference is clearly to those who had the gospel presented to them.

Even among these, some believed and were made sons of God (John 1:12). So the "loving of darkness" applies only to those who actively reject revealed truth—not to all men universally.

As for interpreting "love" here to mean "choose", the Greek will not bear such a translation (egapesan means they loved). Loving and choosing are not equivalent. The passage describes affection and

allegiance to the ways of darkness, not an intellectual decision between options. The love of darkness is not merely a passive preference, but a wilful rejection of the gospel's offer of peace, life, and immortality through Christ.

To conclude that Christ died for all merely because many rejected His preaching is flawed logic. If anything, one might more rightly infer the opposite: that He did not die for all, because belief itself is not given to all (Phil. 1:29).

3. On the Parenthetical Question: "How could it be, if no light were for them?"

If this means that God intended to give saving light to all, then we must decline such a claim, for God's purpose never fails (Isa. 46:10).

His counsel stands forever (Ps. 33:11), and He does not change (Mal.

3:6; James 1:17). To suggest He intended to enlighten all who remain in darkness contradicts His own Word and attributes.

If, instead, the phrase simply means there is light available in the preached gospel, just as the sun provides light to all though some are blind, then we agree. The fault lies in man's blindness, not in God's intention. But this does not advance the case for universal atonement

—it merely shows man's guilt in rejecting the light that is set before him.

4. The Other Scriptures Cited Jonah 2:8 refers to idolaters abandoning the true God and forfeiting the mercies they had already received—not proof of universal grace.

Romans 2:5 addresses Gentiles who hardened themselves despite the testimony of God's works and patience.

Matthew 16:26 and Hosea 13:9 declare that sinners destroy themselves by their sin. But none of these passages teach that Christ died for all or that all are placed in a restored state.

5. The Implied Doctrine of Actual Restoration The closing remarks seem to suggest more than a general offer of salvation—they imply that all mankind has already been restored by Christ to a state of grace, from which some fall again and so perish.

The reasoning is this: men cannot be said to "lose themselves," or "harden their hearts," unless they were once enlightened or softened by Christ. But this idea of actual, universal restoration is deeply flawed.

Let me now respond briefly to that underlying claim.

Response to the Argument and the Assertion of Universal Restoration First, the argument seems to run like this:

Because all men are guilty through original sin, they cannot further aggravate their condemnation by actual sins. Or, because men are born with hard hearts, they cannot make themselves harder by wilful rebellion. Or, since they are blind by nature, they cannot be said to reject the light—though in truth, it is because they are blind that they do so. Or again, that unless souls were already in a saved state, they could not be said to "lose" them.

This line of reasoning is put forth as plain and scriptural. But nothing could be more at odds with reason, with the testimony of Scripture, and with the basic principles of God's revelation. Surely no reader could be so naïve as to imagine that a wilful rejection of the offered remedy—accompanied by many other offences against God—is not sufficient to make one justly responsible for his own condemnation. I speak here particularly of those who live under the preaching of the gospel.

Second, regarding the assertion that all men have been actually restored by Christ to the same covenantal position Adam once held (though not in terms of original righteousness), I understand this to be the author's meaning—especially as he elsewhere affirms that all are justified in Christ, though he offers no explanation of how this could be.

To this I reply:

1. Scripture gives no support whatsoever to such a claim.

There is not a single passage that even suggests such a universal restoration.

2. The claim contradicts:

(a) Multiple clear texts that state we are "dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph. 2:1); that we "must be born again" to enter the

kingdom (John 3:3); and that apart from faith in Christ, "the wrath of God remains" on us (John 3:36). Scripture repeatedly describes all people as alienated from God until actual reconciliation is made through Christ.

(b) The nature of the new covenant of grace, which is rooted in God's free mercy toward His elect and marked by distinctive, effectual promises. It distinguishes the seed of the woman from the seed of the serpent—not only in Christ the Head but in all

His members. This covenant works powerfully in all to whom it belongs, and is consistently said to be made with God's people— not with all mankind. If all men were restored into covenant by Christ, none of these biblical descriptions could stand.

(c) The doctrine of election and reprobation. The latter is God's sovereign decree to leave some in their fallen state without redemption in Christ. This would be impossible if all were restored in Him.

(d) This view leads to numerous absurd and unscriptural consequences, such as:

[1] That all infants dying before reaching the age of reason must be saved—meaning the children of idolaters, atheists, and persecutors would be in a better condition than apostles and faithful saints who, under this system, remain in danger of damnation. Yet Christ says no one enters the kingdom without being born again (John 3:3), and Paul says that the children of unbelievers are unclean (1 Cor.

7:14), and no unclean thing enters the New Jerusalem (Rev.

21:27).

[2] That no more is required for salvation than simply remaining as one was born—that is, in the supposed covenant state restored by Christ. Yet the whole of Scripture insists that those who remain in that natural state will perish.

[3] That every person who perishes has fallen from the grace of the new covenant. But this contradicts the covenant's promise: that none who are truly in it shall utterly fall away.

[4] That only those who once had union with Christ and fell from it can come to Him, since all others, supposedly, already remain in Him.

Such conclusions are not only erroneous but destructive to the doctrine of free and sovereign grace. They inevitably flow from the false assertion of a universal covenantal restoration in Christ.

Any discerning reader will see that such arguments, rather than proving the point, expose the underlying falsehood of the entire system.

Fifth, the final sentence of the proof deserves a brief reply:

"God is no hard master, to gather where He has not sown."

To this we answer:

Indeed, God sowed the seed of life in Adam and bestowed abundant temporal blessings upon all his descendants, and spiritual mercies upon some. From these benefits, God will rightly call unbelievers to account—not because He sowed gospel grace in all without

exception, but because some had Christ plainly offered and willfully rejected Him. As for others, judgment is rendered according to the light and opportunity they were given.

Proof 15: God's Expostulations with Sinners and the Claim of Universal Redemption Claim:

God frequently contends with and pleads earnestly with those who ultimately perish. Examples include:

"Oh, that there were such a heart in them, that they would fear me" (Deut. 5:29); "What more could I have done to my vineyard?" (Isa. 5:4);

"What iniquity have your fathers found in me?" (Jer. 2:5); "Have I been a wilderness to Israel?" (Jer. 2:31);

"Oh, my people, what have I done unto thee?" (Mic. 6:3); "How often would I have gathered you, and you would not"

(Matt. 23:37); "Oh, that my people had hearkened unto me" (Ps. 81:13); "Because I have called and you refused" (Prov. 1:24–31);

"They knew God, but glorified Him not" (Rom. 1:21); "You are inexcusable, O man" (Rom. 2:1);

"You treasure up wrath for yourself" (Rom. 2:5).

From these texts, the argument concludes: since God thus pleads with men, even with those who perish, no one can say God never intended good to them, or that Christ made no atonement for them.

Answer:

Let us consider several points in response to this collection of divine complaints and charges.

1. No Mention of Atonement or Ransom for the Perishing None of these texts mention that a ransom was paid or an atonement made for those who perish—which is the central point being asserted. These passages speak primarily of temporal mercies and the outward means of grace. As we noted previously, God does not bring charges against sinners for not accepting a ransom that was never made for them. Nor will they on the last day claim that He failed to provide it.

This does not mean there is no cause for God to plead with sinners concerning the blood of Christ. Certainly, it serves to draw the elect to repentance and to make the wicked more inexcusable. But the texts cited here do not establish God's redemptive purpose in Christ toward the reprobate.

2. These Exhortations Are Directed Only to Some Except for Romans 1:28 and 2:5—which refer to knowledge gained through creation and providence, not through Christ or the gospel— all the other passages apply to those who had the external means of grace. In the time these words were spoken, that group was a very

small fraction of humanity. Therefore, these texts cannot be used to deduce God's universal redemptive intention toward all people. As Psalm 147:19–20 affirms, God's Word and statutes were not made known to every nation.

3. All Who Enjoy God's Mercies Are Accountable Every person who enjoys God's temporal or spiritual blessings— especially those under the gospel—receives enough mercy that God may rightly charge them with ingratitude and rebellion when they do not respond with obedience.

4. God Could Effectually Work Repentance if He Willed All would agree that the things God charges sinners for lacking— repentance, faith, obedience—He could infallibly produce in them by His power, if He so willed. Therefore, these divine complaints are not revelations of His eternal purpose, for God never fails to accomplish what He purposes (Rom. 9:19).

5. Attributing Desires and Longings to God Is Improper To ascribe emotional "wishings" to God—such as "Oh, that my people had hearkened unto me"—is to speak in human terms. God is not a man. Such language is not literal but accommodates human understanding. Just as God is said to have "eyes," "ears," or "hands," so also these expressions communicate God's moral will, not His eternal, sovereign decree. They do not imply frustration or failure in His purpose.

6. These Are Moral Appeals, Not Declarations of Universal Redemption

All these expressions are pathetic appeals—earnest expressions of God's moral will—designed to convict disobedient hearers under the outward administration of the covenant. They are declarations of duty, not revelations of God's secret will. They highlight man's guilt and God's righteousness, not a universal atonement.

To conclude from such passages that therefore Christ died for all men is a leap that has no basis in Scripture or reason.

7. Specific Texts of Greater Weight Have Already Been Answered Several of the most commonly cited passages in this list (such as Matt. 23:37 and Deut. 5:29) have been addressed previously and shown not to support the doctrine of universal redemption.

In conclusion, these passionate divine appeals highlight human sin, underscore our duty under the gospel, and magnify God's righteous judgments. But they offer no foundation for the claim that Christ died for all without exception. Rather, they reinforce the truth that where grace is offered and rejected, guilt is intensified—not that redemption was universally intended.

Proof 16: The Language of Scripture Concerning Those Who Perish Claim:

Scripture describes those who reject the gospel in severe terms. They "turn the grace of God into wantonness" (Jude 4); "trample underfoot the Son of God," and "profane the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified" (Heb. 10:29); they "deny the Lord who

bought them" (2 Pet. 2:1); they "perish for whom Christ died" (1 Cor.

8:11); they are "twice dead, plucked up by the roots" (Jude 12–13); and they "bring upon themselves swift destruction" (2 Pet. 2:1). If Christ did not die for them, how could such things be said?

Answer:

1. The key texts (Heb. 10:29; 2 Pet. 2:1; 1 Cor. 8:11) have already been addressed at length. None support the claim that Christ died for all without exception. They have been misinterpreted and misapplied.

2. As for Jude 4, 12–13, the accusation that some "turn the grace of God into wantonness" means they abuse the doctrine of grace to excuse sin. But this is no proof that Christ died for them. In fact, Jude says they were "ordained to condemnation," which stands in direct opposition to God's redemptive love in Christ.

3. The other texts only affirm the guilt of those who misuse God's mercies or reject His truth. They do not establish that Christ offered atonement for those who perish. The weight of the argument rests on the aforementioned verses, all of which have been thoroughly refuted.

Proof 17: Christ as Judge According to the Gospel Claim:

Christ, by virtue of His death, will judge all people by the gospel, even those who rejected it and perished. If He did not die for them,

how could He justly judge them according to that gospel? (Rom.

14:9–12; Phil. 2:7–11; Rom. 2:16; John 12:47–50) Answer:

1. That Christ will judge all men is true and affirmed in Scripture.

But this does not imply He died for all, unless we also conclude He died for the devils, who will likewise be judged by Him.

2. The claim that all will be judged by the gospel, even those who never heard it, contradicts Scripture: "As many as have sinned without the law shall also perish without the law" (Rom. 2:12).

People are judged according to the light they possessed, not according to revelation they never received.

3. The expression "Christ died the first death" is foreign to Scripture. He died the death that was the curse of the law, not merely a physical death.

4. The idea that the gospel has no truth unless Christ died for all is plainly false. The gospel proclaims Christ as Saviour of all who believe, and Lord of all, whether to save or to judge.

These texts speak of His exaltation and judicial authority, not universal redemption.

Proof 18: Contending for the "Common Salvation"

Claim:

Jude exhorts believers to contend for "the faith once delivered to the saints," a "common salvation" (Jude 3–5). Some abuse it, while others neglect it and fall away from salvation already wrought by Christ for all. This proves Christ died for all.

Answer:

1. The phrase "common salvation" does not imply it is common to all mankind, any more than "common faith" (Titus 1:4) implies all have faith. The faith is called common because it is shared among the saints—the elect. Likewise, the salvation in view is common only to believers.

2. The argument's remainder is filled with rhetorical flourishes but lacks any firm scriptural foundation. It implies that salvation accomplished by Christ is ineffective unless made so by human will—a position that undermines the sovereign efficacy of Christ's atonement and places the outcome of redemption in the hands of fallen men.

Final Evaluation of the Argument for Universal Atonement These three final "proofs" are intended to summarise and reinforce the entire argument. The author calls them "plain and according to Scripture," claiming they prove that Christ paid a ransom for all people. But a careful reader will see:

The expressions are often ambiguous, confusing, and imprecise;

The reasoning is shallow, forced, and logically flawed; The interpretations of Scripture are strained, misleading, and contrary to the text's context.

In truth, the claim that Christ died for all without exception is not clearly taught in any of the passages cited. The inference drawn— that His atonement was made for every person—is neither evident from the language nor consistent with the broader witness of Scripture.

It remains for the careful Christian reader to discern whether the Scripture truly supports this doctrine—or whether, instead, it clearly teaches that Christ laid down His life for His sheep, His people, His bride, His elect.

- End of Book IV and End of Book -

-----

MONERGISM BOOKS

The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (Abridged) by John Owen, Copyright © 2025 All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright

Conventions. By downloading this eBook, you have been granted the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and read the text of

this e-book on-screen. No part of this text may be reproduced, transmitted, downloaded, decompiled, reverse engineered, or stored in or introduced into any information storage and retrieval system, in any form or by any means, whether electronic or mechanical, now known or hereinafter invented, without the express written permission of Monergism Books. ePub, .mobi & .pdf Editions April 2025. Requests for information should be addressed to: Monergism Books, PO Box 491, West Linn,

OR 97068

↑ Back to top