Friday, November 8, 2013

A Brief Objection to Limited Atonement

           Of the five points of Calvinism, Limited or Definite Atonement strikes me as the most incompatible with the Scriptures.  Though Calvinists have Scripture passages they believe support the doctrine, I find there is more Scripture to clearly oppose it.  I would like to briefly outline what I believe is the correct position on the doctrine of the atonement.  First, let us look at the other side:

Calvinists’ View
            When Jesus was offered as a sacrifice for sins, he had specific sinners in mind, namely the elect.  God purposed beforehand to save a certain group of people and sent Jesus to die for those people.  He had a definite purpose for the death of Christ.  God did not accept the death of Jesus as a general covering or substitution for every sinner, but for a particular group of sinners, those he had predestined to salvation.  In John 10:11-16, 26-29  Jesus speaks of laying down his life for the sheep.  God had given him certain people, the sheep, and they are the definite object for his work on the cross.  Also Ephesians 5:25 reveals that “Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it.”  The goats and the non-church are not mentioned here as the object of Christ death.  Jesus speaks of a propitiation for a limited, definite group of people – his people (Matt 1:21.)
My Objections
            2 Peter 2:1, “But there are false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.  We find here a group of false teachers, preaching a different gospel, denying Christ, headed for destruction.  Yet even these people are the object of redemption, though they rejected it.  I believe that this verse reveals the extent of the sacrifice of Christ.  He died and bought even false teachers, who, despite this sacrifice, reject Christ and receive condemnation.  These teacher were unsaved, headed for hell and leading others with them, yet they are among those that Christ died for.
            Another verse that makes Definite Atonement objectionable is 1 John 2:1-2, “My little children, these things I write unto you, that ye sin not.  And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our’s only, but also for the sins of the whole world.”  Christians have an advocate in heaven, Jesus Christ, who intercedes for us.  This intercession and removal of sins is made possible because of the covering that Christ’s death provided.  But though Christians have an advocate, the whole world has a covering.  The Bible clearly states that Christ death afforded a covering for not just the sins of the elect, but also the sins of the unsaved, the whole world.  The world does not have an advocate but they do have an opportunity, a way of salvation, a means of removing sin – the death of Christ.  This verse seems to emphatically indicate that the whole world, every sinner, was the object of the atonement.
            This doctrine of unlimited or general atonement often leads to the accusation of universal salvation.  Since Christ covered all the sins of the world then why do they not go to heaven?  A simple answer is that the atonement was provided for them, intended for them, but was not applied to them.  The non-elect have no high priest, no advocate, and no intercessor.  Christ offered a gift, paid for by his blood, but they rejected it.  Thus the death of Christ was sufficient for all, intended for all, but only applied to those who repent and believe.  Let us take this message to the whole world:  “Christ died for every one of you: repent of your sins, and call upon the name of the Lord and you will be saved.”