The Extent of Atonement

 

Systematic Theology

Steve Rowe

May 3, 2003

 

I.                    Overview

a.       Atonement is the reconciliation between God and man brought about by the death of Christ.  It is the reparation for our sin.

II.                 The nature of atonement

a.       Governmental theory

                                                              i.      Developed by Grotius (1583-1645; 4th leader of the Arminians) and held by many Arminians today.

                                                            ii.      God is like a government.  It cannot just fail to enforce the laws (punish sin).  God must maintain the validity of the laws.  In order to save us, he sent Christ to die, not as payment for our sins but as a substitute for the penalty of sin.  God demonstrated that he requires suffering for sin by making Christ suffer.  Christ’s death allows God to forgive our sins while keeping the moral fiber of the universe in tact.

b.      Penal-substitution theory

                                                              i.      Became popular during the Reformation (as opposed to Catholic views).  Held by Calvinists today.

                                                            ii.      God is holy and must exact punishment for sin.  The penalty for sin is death (Romans 6:23).  When Christ came to earth and died, he paid this penalty.  Those who believe are forgiven of their sin because Christ paid the penalty for it (Romans 3:25).

c.       Penal-substitution seems closer to the Biblical teachings.  The governmental view indicates that God is able to set aside the requirements of the law because he demonstrated the penalty for violating it.  The Bible says that Christ came to fulfill the law (Matt 5:17), not set it aside.  Once fulfilled, the law no longer applies to Christians (Romans 7:6).

d.      The Bible states that Christ’s death was a sacrificial offering (Romans 8:5-6), a ransom (Mat. 20:28), expiation [suffering on our behalf] (1 Pet 3:18), and propitiation [appeasement of wrath] (1 John 2:2).

III.               The extent of atonement

a.       Did Christ die for everyone?

                                                              i.      Reformed Calvinists generally hold to a limited view of atonement (the ‘L’ in TULIP).

                                                            ii.      4-point Calvinists hold to a universal atonement.

                                                          iii.      Both Arminians and Biblicists hold to a universal view of atonement.

b.      What is meant when we say that Christ died for all?

                                                              i.      4-point Calvinists mean that Christ’s death is sufficient for all of humanity but access to its effects is still limited to the elect. 

                                                            ii.      It should be asked in what way was Christ’s death “for all” when it is not available to them?

                                                          iii.      Arminians and Biblicists believe that not only is Christ’s death sufficient for all but it is also available to all.

c.       Doesn’t Christ dying for all lead to universalism [all are saved]?

                                                              i.      5-point Calvinists say yes.  They view Christ’s atonement and its application as the same thing.  Christ’s atonement is payment for the sins of each individually.  Anyone He pays for is forgiven of sin and thus saved.  Thus he can only die for the elect.

                                                            ii.      The answer is that Christ’s death is sufficient for all.  His payment was so large, everyone could potentially benefit from it.

                                                          iii.      Obviously, not everyone is saved.  How can that be?  God put a requirement upon us to believe in Christ in order to have His payment credited to us. 

                                                          iv.      George Wilson was a man who, in 1829, robbed the mail and in the process killed someone.  He was sentenced to death.  President Andrew Jackson pardoned him but Wilson refused to accept the pardon.  The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court.  Chief Justice John Marshall “A pardon is a paper, the value of which depends upon its acceptance by the person implicated.  It is hardly to be supposed that one under sentence of death would refuse to accept a pardon, but if it is refused, it is no pardon.”  Likewise, we have a pardon available for our sins but must accept it or face the consequences of our actions.

                                                            v.      Just because payment was made does not make a person not a sinner.  If it did, Christ’s death before most of the elect were born would make them born holy, not “objects of wrath” (Eph. 2:3).

IV.              What the Bible says

a.       Limited Atonement verses

                                                              i.      Romans 8:31-34: “What, then, shall we say in response to this?  If God is for us, who can be against us?  He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?  Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen?  It is God who justifies.  Who is he that condemns?  Christ Jesus, who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.”

a.       Arguments supporting limited atonement

b.      This passage is clearly limiting its audience to believers (“us”, “chosen”).

c.       Intercession and atonement are two aspects of his one sacrifice so he saves only those he intercedes for and intercedes only for the elect.

2.      Responses

a.       There is nothing exclusive about this passage.  It says Christ died for Christians but doesn’t say only Christians.  Other passages can and do enlarge this group.

b.      Atonement and intercession are not coequal.  Christ died for all but intercedes only for those who believe.

c.       This is the best verse James White can come up with.  The Bible simply doesn’t teach limited atonement.

                                                            ii.      Matthew 26:28:  “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”

1.      Argument supporting limited atonement:  “Jesus plainly tells his disciples that His blood was not shed for all, but for many.” – Tom Ross

2.      Response:  Christ died for many, not only for many.  There are many groups that Christ is said to have died for including Jews (John 4:22), His people Israel (Luke 1:68), Paul (Gal. 2:20), the Church (Acts 20:28), etc.  These groups are not coequal.

b.      Unlimited Atonement Verses

                                                              i.      Christ died for the world – John 1:29:  “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.”

                                                            ii.      Christ died for every man – Hebrews 2:9:  “he might taste death for everyone.”

                                                          iii.      Christ died for all – 1 Timothy 2:6:  “who gave himself as a ransom for all men.”

                                                          iv.      Christ died for the same all that Adam caused to fall

1.      1 Cor. 15:22:  “For as in Adam all die, so in Christ, all will be made alive.”

2.      Romans 5:18:  “Consider, 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.”

                                                            v.      Christ died for sinners who won’t be saved

1.      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.”  Notice the contrast between Christians (“our”) and the world. 

2.      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.”  Clearly Christ is the savior of more than merely those who believe.

3.      2 Peter 2:1:  “But there were also false prophets among the people…even denying the Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.”  The Lord bought the false prophets who are condemned.

                                                          vi.      God wants to save everyone, not just the elect.

1.      1 Timothy 2:4:  “who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.”

2.      2 Peter 3:9:  “He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but wanting everyone to come to repentance.”

c.       How can you teach limited atonement in the face of these verses?

                                                              i.      Theology blinds you to the truth:

1.      John 3:16:  “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.”

2.      Arthur Pink shows the typical response:  “The ‘world’ in John 3:16 must, in the final analysis, refer to the world of God’s people.  Must we say, for there is no alternative solution.”

3.      This shows theology going too far.  The Bible says one thing but it can’t say that because it would mean the theology is wrong so theology wins.  This is also known as eisogesis.

4.      John 3:19 shows the fallacy of this reasoning.  “Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.”  Christ was sent to the world of sinful men, many of whom rejected him.

                                                            ii.      World is rendered as the world of the elect or all races, nations, creeds, etc.  All is rendered all of the elect.  This is true even when the same word is used for the extent of the fall within the same verse.