A review of the term "all" in its context in 1 Tim 2......
If this is UR doctrine, which it appears to be, it stops here. It is false and against the TOS to be discussed.
Jesus died for everyone, however, the only ones who will be saved are those who believe this and make him Lord.
1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (NKJV)
If God desires all men to be saved, then Jesus died for all men, without exception or else this statement self-destructs.
Before anyone should make the claim that the word "all men" in 1Tim 2 means each and every man that ever lived in all times, we should check and see if the universal understanding of the word "all men" is internally consistent within the context. I take a position that the greek word for "all" (pas pasa pan) does not have to mean "each and every man that ever lived" within the context of 1Tim 2. The word "all" (Pas pasa pan) is used 5 times in the context of 1Tim.
1Ti 2:1 I exhort therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings, be made for all men;
The word pas (all) is used twice in verse 1. Paul writes "first of all." The use of the word here does not speak of men, but of an order. Paul is saying "first in the order."
The second use in this verse suggests that pray be made for "all men." If a person assumes that the word "all" always means all men in all times everywhere, then we should assume that the person will pray for all men, in all times, without any exceptions. I would ask if any readers collect phone books? If you read the word "all" as all men without exception, then you should get your local phone book and then start going down the list of names, and then when you finish, continue to get other phone books until you have prayed for each and every man in the world. But then you should make sure you get death records so that you can pray for those in other times. It this sounds absurd, it might be because the word "pas" (all) does
not have to mean "each and every person that ever lived without any exceptions." In verse 1, we are to pray 1Ti 2:1 I exhort therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings, be made for
all kinds of men. It can be seen in the context how Paul is speaking of "all kinds or categories of men," and not "all men without exception." Notice Paul moves to categories of men in verse 2.
1Ti 2:2 for kings and all that are in high place; that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and gravity.
The category Paul mentions here concerns rules. This is also the third use of the term "all." In this verse, if the term "all" must always include all men in all times everywhere, then we have a problem. That reading would clearly make nonsense of verse 2 where Paul is talking about rules and kings. Also, if you prayed for all men everywhere in verse 1, then would not verse 2 be redundant? The kings would already be covered. However, the term "All" does not always mean each and every man without exception. To Paul is instructing us to pray for the category of men that are rulers here.
1Ti 2:4 who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth.
John Piper, a Calvinist, believes that there are two wills of God. There is his decree, and then his desire. Piper softens verse 4 to speak not of a decree that all men be saved, but a desire. While I greatly appreciate Pipers ministry, and think highly of his gifted abilities to do exegesis, I cannot agree with Piper. Again, because of the context in verses 1-2, I think this context is using the term "all" (pas) as speaking of all kinds of men, but not all men without exception. If God wills all men without exception to be saved, and
not all men are saved, then will God spend eternity standing and looking into hell weaping because he could not save everyone? Or maybe he will get over it and just forget those he was unable to save because of the sovereign free will of man. Does not the Arminian reading of this text say that our will is greater then Gods will. Gods will wanted us to be saved, but our will had its way?
It seems more natural to read the term "all men" in the same way as in verses 1-2. Then verse 4 would be saying that God wants all kinds of men to be saved. This would include Jew and Gentile, male and female, slave and free, and maybe even a few of those smelly barbarian Scythians.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, one mediator also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus,
1Ti 2:6 who gave himself a ransom for all; the testimony to be borne in its own times;
Here is where the tension really comes in. If the term "all" means all men at all times, everywhere." If it means "all men without exception." The Jesus becomes the mediator for unbelieving sinners. He mediates on the basis of his blood, but his blood is insufficient for all men without exception. Verse 6 is the verse that has the word "All" and it speaks of the ranson of Christs crosswork. It was a ransom for all men without exception, or a ransom for all categories of men? If a person continues to read the word "all" as all men without exception, he will certainly have trouble with universalism. This issue came up above in this thread because there seems to be no logical way to read Christs mediation and his work of ransom, and yet it does nothing. I would agree with the universalistic understanding that when Christ stands between man and God on the basis of his shed blood, it saves. Where we disagree is on the meaning of the word "all." I don't see how the Arminian reading can be consistent in its use of the term "all" within the context.
1Ti 2:8 I desire therefore that the men pray in every place, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and disputing.
This is the final use of the term "all" in the context. This use of the term does not speak directly of men, but it returns to the theme of prayer. Prayer is the bookends of the context. In this use of the term "all" men are to pray in all places. Again, I would ask is this a command to pray in each and every place without exception? Or in all kinds of places? When is the last you prayed, moved a step, prayed, moved a step, and tried to pray one step at a time accross your city? State? country? world? Don't forget Mt Everest! And when you finish earth, please schedule your trip to the moon and begin again. To actually take the world "All" as meaning all places without exception is an absurdity. It is much more natural to see the term "All" as speaking of all categories of places, or all kinds of places.
My conclusion is that it is very artificial and unnatural to force the word "All" to mean "all men without exception" in the context of 1 Tim 2. This verse, with 1 John 2:2, and a few other verses are the common few verses repeated over and over to refute the concept of an actual atonement. In my opinion, such a view devalues the power of the atonement to save. The Arminian view is truly the "very limited" atonement because it does not save. I recently spoken to an Arminian that is uncomfortable with the term "limited" atonement. I myself prefer the term "particular redemption." The atonement is infinite in its power to save. The atonement is superlative in its power to save. We are saved to the "uttermost." If we add trillions and trillions and zillions more people to the elect, Christ would not have to shed any more blood, he would not have to suffer any more because the value of that atonement was infinite. But each and every drop, we shed for the elect and not for "all men without exception."
