# QUESTION on Limited Atonement



## Andrew Gordon (Oct 23, 2010)

I do belive the atonement to only be for God's people, those united to Christ by faith. Here's my question: Is it possible to say that in a way Christ died for everyone because even common grace is a benefit of the atonement? If Christ had not died there would be neither common or saving grace, correct? So, essentially the reprobate receive mercy and common grace through Christ's death as well?

Is this what I Timothy 4:10 speaks of when Paul says, "For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe."

Would Jesus technically be the Savior of all men because His death purchased both common AND saving grace, but especially for those who believe like the verse says? Obviously only saving grace is electing grace.

This idea was recently brought to my attention. It's interesting to me because I think it is partially correct, but I'm not completely comfortable with saying that Jesus died for all men, to purchase common grace for all and saving grace for some. 

What are your thoughts


----------



## Bookmeister (Oct 23, 2010)

No. The Greek word in question here is malista, it is a marker of higher certitude, we might better translate it "particularly." This is an example of hoe exegeting based on the English translation alone can be dangerous.


----------



## Andrew Gordon (Oct 23, 2010)

just to play devil's advocate here Josh: if common grace would not come if Christ had not, doesn't it follow to say that common grace is a benefit of the cross?


----------



## Andrew Gordon (Oct 23, 2010)

Right, and I completely agree with you about the mission of Christ and the benefits of that mission only for the elect. 
Thank you for your patience in answering. 
I guess when I use the term "common grace" I'm referring to the fact that all born in Adam don't deserve a single breath or heartbeat and the fact that they enjoy both points to their temporary preservation made possible by the death of Christ, even though they are headed towards eternal destruction. 
Does that make sense? 
I've never thought of that until last night and I'm trying to figure out why it's wrong...


----------



## Andrew Gordon (Oct 23, 2010)

Well I guess I take the "all born in Adam don't deserve a single breath or heartbeat" from the fact that God did not kill Adam and Eve immediately after they sinned as they deserved. So any breath, heartbeats, or any gifts at all are equally undeserved and all resultant because of God's mercy

---------- Post added at 09:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:03 PM ----------

I'm sorry, this is a hard conversation to have over a keyboard. I probably come off as either a wacko or rude. I'm just trying to clear up these thoughts that recently popped in my brain.


----------



## TeachingTulip (Oct 23, 2010)

Andrew Gordon said:


> just to play devil's advocate here Josh: if common grace would not come if Christ had not, doesn't it follow to say that common grace is a benefit of the cross?



You presuppose a common grace has indeed come to all men by God, and you attribute this to the cross work of Christ.

Sounds good. Sounds religious. Sounds generous. Sounds loving. Sounds "PC" . . . but it is not a legitimate nor biblical premise.

For there are no promises of a "common grace" to be found in any of the covenants. 

All of the efficacious covenants established between God and man are directed to benefit a particular and chosen people. (Galatians 4:28)

"Universalism" in any shape or form (which includes the theory of common grace from God towards all men), fails to stand the scrutiny of the purposes of God revealed throughout the Holy Scriptures.

I totally reject the term or notion of "common grace."


----------



## lynnie (Oct 23, 2010)

_I probably come off as either a wacko or rude._

Not at all. As one who is around teens and young adults all the time, plus arminians, it is good to think these things out from every possible angle.


----------



## Andrew Gordon (Oct 23, 2010)

Thanks guys! Ronda, I completely agree with you. Seeing that "common grace" is not a mentioned benefit in the covenant of grace that God made in eternity past. I agree, the covenant is only with Christ and His people. Do you think then, that what people call common grace is really only just a side effect of the great covenant of grace? Like the existence of wheat necessitates chaff? Does that make sense? Because although the reprobate's end is destruction, it still is gracious of God to let them live for a time. 
Thank you for pointing that out about the covenant.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Oct 24, 2010)

God is kind to all people. The difference between God's kindness toward the elect and the reprobate, however, is that God's kindness toward His elect is done _out of love_ (thus the term "lovingkindness"), while His kindness toward the reprobate only serves their destruction. This is the consistent teaching of the Scriptures (Job 24:18, 23, 24; Malachi 3:9, 15; Psalm 90:5, 6; Psalm 37:1, 2, 7, 16, 21, 22; Malachi 2:2; Proverb 1:32; Psalm 69:22-25, 27, 28; Proverb 11:31; Psalm 73:17-19; Malachi 1:2-4; Psalm 92:6, 7; Psalm 3:33). 

The fact is... that an outward gift of God (which has no influence on the state of human heart), in and of itself, is of no benefit at all to a person, if not received with thanksgiving (1 Tim 4:4, 5), it only serves the destruction of the participant of God's common kindness (I prefer not to use the word 'grace' because there is no necessary grace in kindness***) and therefore, by their unthankfulness the reprobate are just treasuring up wrath for themselves against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God (Rom. 2:5).

***The word 'grace', in its biblical sense, means favor (which is inevitably connected with love). So, whenever one is under God's grace, it is said of that person to have "found grace/favour in the sight of God" (this phrase recurs dozens of times in the Bible, just search for yourself - the keywords: 'find', 'grace', 'favor', 'in the sight of'). *NOTE:* ‘grace’ or ‘love’ are _never_ used in the Bible in reference to the reprobate wicked.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Oct 24, 2010)

Andrew,

First, you are missing the context of I Timothy 4:10. Second, you are missing the meaning of the term 'Saviour'.

From Strong's Concordance:

*σώζω (sōtēr)*

*1) saviour, deliverer, preserver*
The name was given by the ancients to deities, esp. tutelary deities, to princes, kings, and in general to men who had conferred signal benefits upon their country, and in more degenerate days by the way of flattery to personages of influence.(Wigram) The word soter was a common Greek epithet for the gods (e.g., Zeus, Apollo, and Hermes), active personalities in world affairs (e.g., Epicurus) and rulers (e.g., Ptolemy Philopator, and later Roman Emporers). (cf. LSJ and BDAG)

'Saviour' has the meaning of a provider. Thus, 1 Tim 4:10 is simply talking about God's providence toward His creation. And this should become even more evident by considering the right context of this text. In verses 3 and 4 we have a clear reference to God's providence.

Now, it is appropriate to ask, How is God, then, _"specially"_ a provider ("Saviour") of "those that believe"? Well, first I want you to note how God is a provider of all men _in that He gives them life_. Yet, the sad truth is God does not give all men _everlasting_ life, but only life in this life. And now should we be able to grasp this! God has a special providence toward those that are of His elect ("those that believe"), because He will not just grant them _temporary_ life, but life unto _everlasting_!


----------



## Peairtach (Oct 24, 2010)

Robert L. Dabney held to this idea that common grace was related to the Cross. See his Systematic Theology online under the Atonement and its extent.

I believe that Dabney's view has been discussed on the PB to some extent before.

Some Calvinists believe in common grace, some don't, and some have different ideas as to its nature and basis.


----------



## Poimen (Oct 24, 2010)

1 Timothy 4:10 indicates that Jesus is the Savior of all but it does not teach that He _has_ saved all. In other words Jesus is the only Saviour for every man but not every man is saved.This is indicated in the last portion of the sentence which limits Christ's saving work to those who believe. For we cannot be saved outside of faith; faith takes hold of Christ as Saviour. 

So Ursinus comments:



> “The forgiveness of sins is extended to all and only the elect; because it is given to such as believe. In as much now as the reprobate never do truly believe, they never receive the forgiveness of sins. “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life.” “To him gave all the prophets witness, that through his name, whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” (John 3:36; Acts 10:43)


_ Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism_.

Thus I do believe it is legitimate to speak of an offer of salvation to everyone insofar as God calls all men (in the Bible "the nations") to repentance and faith in Christ without indicating that each and everyone is already atoned for by virtue of Christ's satisfaction. And, personally, I don't think this text is implying anything more than that.


----------



## schwarzeneggerchia (Nov 9, 2010)

sounds so amyraldian


----------



## KaphLamedh (Nov 10, 2010)

Andrew Gordon said:


> I do belive the atonement to only be for God's people, those united to Christ by faith. Here's my question: Is it possible to say that in a way Christ died for everyone because even common grace is a benefit of the atonement?


 
Well, God let the sun shine to everybody. I believe that God give good things, even grace, or is mercy better word, on earth to unsaved and to saved as well, but atonement...well, it is easy to do many kind of philosophies on limited atonement. Many has told me, that L has been the hardest thing to understand on TULIP.
Have you seen John Piper's TULIP dvd? You should watch it. It can be seen also from Derising God websites.


----------

