# Definite Atonement



## Greg (Feb 12, 2006)

I was posed a question from someone who holds to unlimited atonement which I didn't quite know how to answer. I was asked:

"If Christ died only for the elect, how can the offer of salvation be made to all persons without some sort of insincerity? Is it not improper to offer salvation to everyone if in fact Christ did not die to save everyone? How can God authorize His servants to offer pardon to the non-elect if Christ did not purchase it for them?"

I'm sure this has been dealt with before, but how would you answer this person? Thanks.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Feb 12, 2006)

> 1. THE covenant of life is not preached equally to all, and among those to whom it is preached, does not always meet with the same reception. This diversity displays the unsearchable depth of the divine judgment, and is without doubt subordinate to God's purpose of eternal election. But if it is plainly owing to the mere pleasure of God that salvation is spontaneously offered to some, while others have no access to it, great and difficult questions immediately arise, questions which are inexplicable, when just views are not entertained concerning election and predestination. To many this seems a perplexing subject, because they deem it most incongruous that of the great body of mankind some should be predestinated to salvation, and others to destruction. How ceaselessly they entangle themselves will appear as we proceed. We may add, that in the very obscurity which deters them, we may see not only the utility of this doctrine, but also its most pleasant fruits. We shall never feel persuaded as we ought that our salvation flows from the free mercy of God as its fountain, until we are made acquainted with his eternal election, the grace of God being illustrated by the contrast--viz. that he does not adopt all promiscuously to the hope of salvation, but gives to some what he denies to others. It is plain how greatly ignorance of this principle detracts from the glory of God, and impairs true humility. But though thus necessary to be known, Paul declares that it cannot be known unless God, throwing works entirely out of view, elect those whom he has predestined. His words are, "Even so then at this present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work," (Rom. 11:6). If to make it appear that our salvation flows entirely from the good mercy of God, we must be carried back to the origin of election, then those who would extinguish it, wickedly do as much as in them lies to obscure what they ought most loudly to extol, and pluck up humility by the very roots. Paul clearly declares that it is only when the salvation of a remnant is ascribed to gratuitous election, we arrive at the knowledge that God saves whom he wills of his mere good pleasure, and does not pay a debt, a debt which never can be due. Those who preclude access, and would not have any one to obtain a taste of this doctrine, are equally unjust to God and men, there being no other means of humbling us as we ought, or making us feel how much we are bound to him. Nor, indeed, have we elsewhere any sure ground of confidence. This we say on the authority of Christ, who, to deliver us from all fear, and render us invincible amid our many dangers, snares and mortal conflicts, promises safety to all that the Father has taken under his protection (John 10:26). From this we infer, that all who know not that they are the peculiar people of God, must be wretched from perpetual trepidation, and that those therefore, who, by overlooking the three advantages which we have noted, would destroy the very foundation of our safety, consult ill for themselves and for all the faithful. What? Do we not here find the very origin of the Church, which, as Bernard rightly teaches (Serm. in Cantic). could not be found or recognized among the creatures, because it lies hid (in both cases wondrously) within the lap of blessed predestination, and the mass of wretched condemnation?
> 
> But before I enter on the subject, I have some remarks to address to two classes of men. The subject of predestination, which in itself is attended with considerable difficulty is rendered very perplexed and hence perilous by human curiosity, which cannot be restrained from wandering into forbidden paths and climbing to the clouds determined if it can that none of the secret things of God shall remain unexplored. When we see many, some of them in other respects not bad men, every where rushing into this audacity and wickedness, it is necessary to remind them of the course of duty in this matter. First, then, when they inquire into predestination, let then remember that they are penetrating into the recesses of the divine wisdom, where he who rushes forward securely and confidently, instead of satisfying his curiosity will enter in inextricable labyrinth.49[6] For it is not right that man should with impunity pry into things which the Lord has been pleased to conceal within himself, and scan that sublime eternal wisdom which it is his pleasure that we should not apprehend but adore, that therein also his perfections may appear. Those secrets of his will, which he has seen it meet to manifest, are revealed in his word--revealed in so far as he knew to be conducive to our interest and welfare.



[Edited on 2-13-2006 by WrittenFromUtopia]


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Feb 12, 2006)

^
John Calvin, Institutes, Book III, Chapter 21, 1


----------



## youthevang (Feb 12, 2006)

The Gospel is twofold. It is a free offer: "If anyone is thirsty, he should come to Me and drink" (John 7:37) and it is a command: "Now this is His command: that we believe in the name of His son Jesus Christ, and love one another as He has commanded us" (1 John 3:23). You can also check out the thread below.

http://puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=14459#pid203078


----------



## Peter (Feb 12, 2006)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> 
> 
> > *1. THE covenant of life is not preached equally to all, and among those to whom it is preached, does not always meet with the same reception. This diversity displays the unsearchable depth of the divine judgment, and is without doubt subordinate to God's purpose of eternal election. But if it is plainly owing to the mere pleasure of God that salvation is spontaneously offered to some, while others have no access to it, great and difficult questions immediately arise, questions which are inexplicable, when just views are not entertained concerning election and predestination.* To many this seems a perplexing subject, because they deem it most incongruous that of the great body of mankind some should be predestinated to salvation, and others to destruction. How ceaselessly they entangle themselves will appear as we proceed. We may add, that in the very obscurity which deters them, we may see not only the utility of this doctrine, but also its most pleasant fruits. We shall never feel persuaded as we ought that our salvation flows from the free mercy of God as its fountain, until we are made acquainted with his eternal election, the grace of God being illustrated by the contrast--viz. that he does not adopt all promiscuously to the hope of salvation, but gives to some what he denies to others. It is plain how greatly ignorance of this principle detracts from the glory of God, and impairs true humility. But though thus necessary to be known, Paul declares that it cannot be known unless God, throwing works entirely out of view, elect those whom he has predestined. His words are, "Even so then at this present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work," (Rom. 11:6). If to make it appear that our salvation flows entirely from the good mercy of God, we must be carried back to the origin of election, then those who would extinguish it, wickedly do as much as in them lies to obscure what they ought most loudly to extol, and pluck up humility by the very roots. Paul clearly declares that it is only when the salvation of a remnant is ascribed to gratuitous election, we arrive at the knowledge that God saves whom he wills of his mere good pleasure, and does not pay a debt, a debt which never can be due. Those who preclude access, and would not have any one to obtain a taste of this doctrine, are equally unjust to God and men, there being no other means of humbling us as we ought, or making us feel how much we are bound to him. Nor, indeed, have we elsewhere any sure ground of confidence. This we say on the authority of Christ, who, to deliver us from all fear, and render us invincible amid our many dangers, snares and mortal conflicts, promises safety to all that the Father has taken under his protection (John 10:26). From this we infer, that all who know not that they are the peculiar people of God, must be wretched from perpetual trepidation, and that those therefore, who, by overlooking the three advantages which we have noted, would destroy the very foundation of our safety, consult ill for themselves and for all the faithful. What? Do we not here find the very origin of the Church, which, as Bernard rightly teaches (Serm. in Cantic). could not be found or recognized among the creatures, because it lies hid (in both cases wondrously) within the lap of blessed predestination, and the mass of wretched condemnation?
> ...



It does not appear Calvin is speaking of the offer of Christ, which is extended to all universally and distributively, but merely the fact that in providence not all to whom the offer pertains hear it. "How shall they believe in Him who they have not heard?"


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Feb 12, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Greg_
> I was posed a question from someone who holds to unlimited atonement which I didn't quite know how to answer. I was asked:
> 
> "If Christ died only for the elect, how can the offer of salvation be made to all persons without some sort of insincerity? Is it not improper to offer salvation to everyone if in fact Christ did not die to save everyone? How can God authorize His servants to offer pardon to the non-elect if Christ did not purchase it for them?"
> ...



The offer is based upon the promise of God and the need of man. All men need a Savior. Jesus is the only one whom God has given to save sinners. Whether you're reprobate or elect, Christ is the only one who may grant you salvation, and so you must go to Him. And He has promised to receive all who come. Election is God's business. Lifting up Christ before the world is ours. God will draw them in as we are faithful to make Christ known.


----------



## TimeRedeemer (Feb 12, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Greg_
> I was posed a question from someone who holds to unlimited atonement which I didn't quite know how to answer. I was asked:
> 
> "If Christ died only for the elect, how can the offer of salvation be made to all persons without some sort of insincerity? Is it not improper to offer salvation to everyone if in fact Christ did not die to save everyone? How can God authorize His servants to offer pardon to the non-elect if Christ did not purchase it for them?"
> ...



A simple response is we can't know who are elect, so we we offer it to all. 

Also, God's Word convicts those in willful rebellion. Maybe it convicts them in terms of awakening them, maybe it convicts them in terms of hardening them, but the convicting part of hearing the Word of God plays a part in God's plan too.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 12, 2006)

Another potential route:

1. The person is charging God here with duplicity.

2. We consent to the things revealed, we don't use speculation to correct that which God has revealed to us. God has clearly revealed that Christ died for those He was sent to save. We also know, from the things revealed, that Christ's sacrifice atones for the sins of whom it is applied.

3. We have been commanded to preach the Gospel and let God give the increase. We do not know which way the wind blows or how He gives the increase.

There is certainly a tension here but he puts God on trial for not making it clear to him why he should preach the Gospel if he isn't sure that Christ died for all men. He is using speculation about what God _should_ be commanding and revealing instead of what He actually _has_ revealed. I personally don't like to answer speculation with potentially further speculation about God's motives.

[Edited on 2-13-2006 by SemperFideles]


----------



## Puritanhead (Feb 13, 2006)

Even Arminians qualify and thus limit the extent of the atonement. Limited atonement is a misnomer.


----------



## natewood3 (Mar 5, 2006)

I realize I am bringing up something that has been discussed probably numerous times already, but is an atonement that simply makes salvation possible even an atonement at all?


----------



## natewood3 (Mar 5, 2006)

Would it not be possible to see this, even not as a Calvinist?

To say that the death of Christ in and of itself does not save anyone, we are implying that we must add something to it, namely, our faith. However, most Arminians and even some Calvinists do not see a problem in saying that the death of Christ cannot save anyone in and of itself, but I believe it is. The question of course arises, what is the need for faith? 

John Owen contends that essentially what Arminians and those who believe in a general atonement teach is this: 

"œGod intendeth that he shall die for all, to procure for them remission of sins, reconciliation with him, eternal redemption and glory; but yet so that they shall never have the least good by these glorious things, unless they perform that which he knows they are no way able to do, and which none but himself can enable them to perform, and which concerning far the greatest part of them he is resolved not to do." 

Since the Scriptures teach that faith is a gift from God (John 1:13; 2 Tim 2:25; Phil 1:29; Hebrews 12:2; 1 John 5:1; Ezekiel 11:19-20; Ezekiel 36:26-27), and the only way anyone can receive anything good from God is through the cross of Christ, then Christ must have purchased faith and all other things involved in the salvation process. Although faith is a condition for salvation and receiving the benefits of the atonement, there is no condition in the will of God. Owen states, 

"œThe will of God is not at all conditional in this business, as though he gave Christ to obtain peace, reconciliation, and forgiveness of sins, upon the condition that we do believe. There is a condition in the things, but none in the will of God; that is absolute that such things should be procured and bestowed." 

Owen continues to say, 

"And as for those [things] that are bestowed upon condition, the condition on which they are bestowed is actually purchased and procured for us, upon no condition but only by virtue of the purchase. For instance: Christ hath purchased remission of sins and eternal life for us, to be enjoyed on our believing, upon the condition of faith. But faith itself, which is the condition of them, on whose performances they are bestowed, that he hath procured for us absolutely, on no condition at all; for what condition soever can be proposed, on which the Lord should bestow faith. "

Although salvation is received through the instrumentality of faith, God purchased and will bestow faith on all those for whom He intended it. If one does not believe this, he or she has to deal with the fact that God could be disappointed and His will be thwarted because Christ would have died for some that would not fulfill the condition of salvation. 

Charles Hodge rightly states, 

"œThe effect of a ransom and sacrifice may indeed be conditional, but the occurrence of the condition will be rendered certain before the costly sacrifice is offered."


----------



## Me Died Blue (Mar 5, 2006)

> _Originally posted by TimeRedeemer_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Greg_
> ...



Indeed, that truth is integral to understanding how and why the Gospel is offered from our perspective.

Working along with that is the fine but important distinction between saying something to the effect of "God has promised that Jesus died to save you, and if you believe, you will receive that salvation" (false), and saying something to the effect of "God has promised that if you believe, Jesus has died to save you, and you will that salvation" (true).

That is why John 3:16 is completely consistent with Reformed soteriology - regardless of which persons Jesus has and hasn't died for, and regardless of our ignorance of those persons, what we can offer and promise to any person we meet with full sincerity is that _if_ that person ("whosoever") believes, that person will receive eternal life on the basis of the Son's death. The root reason we can guarantee that, and likewise the reason John 3:16 is true, is because God has told us that all those who believe were elected and were objects of Christ's death, since the objects of the five points are in full unity.


----------



## Ron (Mar 5, 2006)

God "invites" to himself those who are burdened and heavy laden with their sin. 

God does not invite "all men" but rather commands all men everywhere to repent.

The "promise," which is _unconditional_, was made to Abraham and his One Seed, who is Christ (Galatians 3), and in Christ to the elect. If the promise was conditional, it couldn't be made only to the elect.

Ron


----------



## Ron (Mar 5, 2006)

Don't let me confuse anyone. We may promise salvation as being for anyone who believes with his heart.... My point is that we should not construe this to mean that the promise of the Abrahamic Covenant was conditional in any sense (see Galatians three and Romans nine).

Ron


----------



## srhoades (Mar 7, 2006)

> _Originally posted by trevorjohnson_
> SMILE!
> 
> God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life...
> ...



Joel Osteen on a reformed message board, who would have thought?



[Edited on 3-8-2006 by srhoades]


----------



## natewood3 (Mar 8, 2006)

The issue of the speaking the Gospel is primarily an issue of the glory of God. God's Word will not return void and it will accomplish all that God desires, even if that means hardening someone to whom the Gospel has been given. All men are commanded to repent, and if they hear the Gospel, the Gospel will serve to condemn them even more on the day of judgment. We can offer the Gospel sincerely knowing that we are primarily doing it to glorify God, and God may use the Word that we spoke to harden that person's heart and thereby glorify His justice and wrath, or He may soften the person's heart and thereby glorify His mercy and grace. It is not an issue whether or not that person is elect. The Gospel should be spoken because whenever it does, it will accomplish God's purposes and glorify Him in the way that please Him.


----------



## Magma2 (Mar 8, 2006)

> _Originally posted by natewood3_
> The issue of the speaking the Gospel is primarily an issue of the glory of God. God's Word will not return void and it will accomplish all that God desires, even if that means hardening someone to whom the Gospel has been given. All men are commanded to repent, and if they hear the Gospel, the Gospel will serve to condemn them even more on the day of judgment. We can offer the Gospel sincerely knowing that we are primarily doing it to glorify God, and God may use the Word that we spoke to harden that person's heart and thereby glorify His justice and wrath, or He may soften the person's heart and thereby glorify His mercy and grace. It is not an issue whether or not that person is elect. The Gospel should be spoken because whenever it does, it will accomplish God's purposes and glorify Him in the way that please Him.





Very clear, to the point, and correct  Too bad so many P&R folks contend, following John Murray and others, that God desires the salvation of all men, yet you contend that God may desire to harden the reprobate in judgment even through the preaching of the gospel. A frightening and sobering truth. Also, you seem to avoid the common ambiguity concerning the word "offer" in that the gospel is to be "presented" to all men without discrimination, even if God discriminates to whom the blessings presented will be applied. 

You don't sound like any Souther Baptist I know. Frankly, you don't even sound like a lot of Reformed folks I know. You sound like a Calvinist.


----------



## natewood3 (Mar 8, 2006)

Sean,

I don't think I am like most Southern Baptist, especially not the ones found in Western KY. I attend an extension center in Jackson, TN, and at least half, if not more are not Calvinists, and most of the ones that are "Calvinists" are probably pretty weak in what they believe. I just see the preaching of the Gospel mainly an issue of the glory of God, not just the salvation of souls. If that is the case, it is to be preached sincerely, because we don't know who the elect are, and God will accomplish what He wants for His glory regardless.


----------



## Magma2 (Mar 9, 2006)

> _Originally posted by natewood3_
> I just see the preaching of the Gospel mainly an issue of the glory of God, not just the salvation of souls.




Great quote and mindset. Refreshing.


----------

