Exploring the Atonement in Christian Theology
Okay let’s get right to it – after a prayer:
PRAYER PRAYER PRAYER
We’re going to begin with brother Slick presenting his explanation of Limited Atonement and I will follow up with a live presentation for UNLIMITED atonement.
Here’s brother Matt:
(AIR MATT SLICKS 15 minute presentation HERE)
Okay, in terms of air time fairness I have to be quick.
The Debate on Atonement
The point being debated tonight is either Jesus atoned for the sins of ONLY the elect OR He atoned for the whole world. The Calvinist view of course is that Christ's atoning death was only for the elect whereby He actually and certainly saved the elect and only the elect. Bible readers recognize that the Bible certainly applies Jesus atonement specifically to those who are His from the foundation of the world. “His sheep,” John 10:11, “His Church,” Ephesians 5:25-27 “His people,” Matthew 1:21, and “the elect,” Romans 8:32-35. "his Own,” John 17. These verses certainly have their application but to use them as proofs that He ONLY paid for the sins of these is akin to saying “Walt Disney created Disneyland for His children (which is true) but obviously it was not ONLY created for his family to enjoy.”
Calvinist Perspective
The Calvinist, however, does make an outstanding point in their stance for Limited Atonement. Why would God have His Son suffer for the sins of those He was never going to elect? Brother Slick’s takes the position is that if a ransom HAS been paid – the debt is stamped paid in full FOR ALL – then it has been paid. And if paid for the whole world then the whole world will have to benefit from His redemptive work. All I can say to this is, “Exactly, brother Slick, amen.” This is the thinking of the Calvinist: "If Jesus paid for ALL sin it automatically frees those for whom this payment was made – which would be all people. Therefore no further obligation can be charged against them. But if all are NOT redeemed by Jesus salvivic work then Jesus work was a fail. He “built Disneyland” but only His family ever attended.
But the Calvinist says no way to such thinking because Jesus is defeated if He died for all men and all men aren't saved AND God would be unfair in sending people to hell for their own sins since they were all paid for. Justifying their position the Calvinist then takes passages in scripture that use the words: "all" “world" and "whosoever" And says they are ONLY speaking of the elect who God has chosen. In other words: "All" refers to "all of the elect" or it has a restricted meaning applicable only to a particular class or kind of classes in scripture (like 1 Corinthians 15:22, Ephians 1:23 or all kinds of classes as in Titus 2:11).
Interpretations and Challenges
So how do Calvinists interpret the Bible when it says “Christ is the "Savior of all men"? They read it as “whoever is elected and saved Christ is their savior.” "World" then refers to the "world of the elect" Remaining consistent, the word "whosoever" is then interpreted to mean "whosoever of the elect." We can see from this that exceptions and additions to scripture have to be made to understand these words in this way.
There are certain Scripture passages, however, that are VERY difficult for anyone to fit within the framework of limited atonement. For example:
John 1:29, where John the Baptist sees Jesus coming His way and says: “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.'" Ironically, the founder of Calvinism (John Calvin) even admits that this verse is irrefutably speaking of universal atonement, saying: "He (John the Beloved) uses the word sin in the singular number for any kind of iniquity; as if he had said that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says the sin of the world, he extends this favor indiscriminately to the whole human race."
The all-familiar John 3:16 says: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." The Greek lexicons are unanimous that "world" here denotes humankind, not the "world of the elect." Regarding this verse John Calvin says: "God is unwilling that we should be overwhelmed with everlasting destruction, because He has appointed His Son to be the salvation of the world." Calvin also stated: "The word world is again repeated, that no man may think himself wholly excluded, if he only keeps the road of faith." Many passages indicate that
Unlimited Atonement Explored
The Gospel is to be universally proclaimed, and this supports unlimited atonement.
In John 8:12 Jesus said: "I am the Light of the world,” not the Light of only the elect with the rest remaining in darkness but the Light of the whole Kosmos. How about Romans 5:6 which says: "You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly." It doesn't make much sense to read this as saying that Christ died for the ungodly of the elect.
Romans 5:18 says: "Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men." All men means all of mankind here folks, no getting around it.
Evidence from the New Testament
2 Corinthians 5:14-15: "For Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again."
1 Timothy 2:3-4: "This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth."
1 Timothy 2:5-6: "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men – the testimony given in its proper time."
1 Timothy 4:10: "We have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe." Admittedly, He is “ESPECIALLY the Savior of those who believe” but He is also clearly the Savior of all men.”
Titus 2:11: "For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men."
Hebrews 2:9: "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone."
2 Peter 3:9: "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." How can this passage be true if Christ died only and exclusively for the elect?
1 John 2:2: "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." Did you note OUR sins and then NOT ONLY OURS but ALSO FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD? Irre-freaking-futable. I don’t care what kind of logical gymnastics Calvinists have to pull to make Limited Atonement make sense 1st John 2:2 is a slam dunk on all the twisting. I mean just a natural reading of this verse, without imposing theological presuppositions on it clearly supports unlimited atonement.
The Extent of Atonement
Isaiah 53:6 says: "We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all" Now listen – this verse does NOT make sense unless we read it to say that the same "all" (that went astray) is the same "all" for whom the Lord died. Millard Erickson puts it this way: "This passage is especially powerful from a logical standpoint. It is clear that the extent of sin is universal; it is specified that every one of us has sinned. It should also be noticed that the extent of what will be laid on the suffering servant exactly parallels the extent of sin. It is difficult to read this passage and not conclude that just as everyone sins, everyone is also atoned for."
In 2 Peter 2:1, it seems that Christ even paid the price of redemption for false teachers who deny Him: "But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them – bringing swift destruction on themselves." This passage will obviously be used again when we get to the Calvinist dogma of Once Saved Always Saved in two weeks.
What about Acts 17:30 where Paul, on Mar’s Hill said: "In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent."
In light of these passages, I think we have to ask: "If Christ died only for the elect, how can the offer of salvation be made to all persons without some sort of insincerity, artificiality, or dishonesty being involved? Is it not improper to offer salvation to everyone?"
The Debate on Limited vs. Unlimited Atonement
"If in fact Christ did not die to save everyone?" Like all man-made systems, we end up with a bit of trickery on the part of God if we are to embrace five-point Calvinism. Simply put, if Jesus died for all, it's reasonable to proclaim His gospel to all. If not, some real issues pop up relative to sharing the Good News – which is one reason that even WITHIN Calvinism there are divisions, including hyper-Calvinists – who have at least been honest enough to admit there’s really no reason if God does the election and the atonement is limited. In other words, those who deny unlimited atonement cannot say to any sinner, "Christ died for you." (After all, he may be one of the non-elect so saying this would be a lie.) I mean if we really think about it, under the teaching of Limited Atonement no Christian has the right to tell another that Jesus died for them – how could we ever say such a thing believing that this may not be true!
1st Timothy 1:15 and Romans 5:6-8 tell us that Christ died for sinners. The word "sinner" nowhere is limited to the elect or to the church. It is used exclusively in the Bible of lost humanity. Scripture tells us that Christ died for sinners, not penitent sinners, and for the ungodly (not for just some of them).
Interpretation of Scriptures
The Calvinist takes passages about Jesus saving His Sheep and the Church and say that because this is true He did NOT die for the rest of the sinful world. As proven here, this is a very, very unbiblical jump. Scriptures rarely include all elements of truth in a single passage which is the problem with quoting one after the other in an effort to build a case. And while it is true that words like "all" and "world" are sometimes used in the Bible in a restricted sense, context – not presupposition – is the rule of thumb. Robert Lightner says: "Those who always limit the meaning of those terms (all and world) in contexts that deal with salvation do so on the basis of theological presuppositions, not on the basis of the texts themselves."
Unlimited atonement has been held by a majority of scholars throughout church history. Millard Erickson points out that unlimited atonement has been "held by the vast majority of theologians, reformers, evangelists, and fathers from the beginning of the church until the present day, including virtually all the writers before the Reformation, with the possible exception of Augustine. Among the Reformers the doctrine is found in Luther, Melanchthon, Bullinger, Latimer, Cranmer, Coverdale, and even Calvin in some of his commentaries…. Is it likely that the overwhelming majority of Christians could have so misread the leading of the Holy Spirit on such an important point?"
Calvin's Position on Atonement
Robert Lightner addresses Calvin's position on the issue: "Those who subscribe to a limited atonement generally argue that that is the position espoused by Calvin. But it is highly debatable that he did, in fact, hold that view…. Whereas some scholars have attempted to show that there is harmony between Calvin and later orthodox Calvinism, others have argued that contemporary Calvinism has veered significantly from Calvin's teaching, including his teaching on the extent of the atonement."
For those (unlike me) who put tons of credit on the opinions of early church fathers Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory, Basil, and Ambrose all taught universal atonement.
Two quick points I need to reiterate: First, if one point of Calvinism fails, the whole house of cards falls – remember that. There is no such thing as a four-point Calvinist. Secondly – and this is VERY VERY IMPORTANT: When it comes to Jesus atoning work, there are really only two reasonable views to consider: That it was limited to only those who God elected and therefore they are saved alone and no others OR that it was universal and therefore the debt was paid for all and ALL will in some respect of another be reconciled to God by Jesus atoning finished work. Arminianism is a fail for the reasons Matt articulated – the debt has either been paid for only some or it has been paid for all. Think about the implications of this.
Let’s open up the phone lines: (801) While the black ops are clearing your calls let’s take a look at this. And when we come back, Brother Matt will join us for Q and A. SHOW SPOT HERE PLEASE.
