READING TIME: 4-7 MINUTES
January 23, 2020
Limited or Unlimited Atonement, Part 3
• Those who believe in limited atonement believe that those who say Christ died for all are limiting the effectiveness of the atonement because only those who believe are saved. On the contrary, the atonement is not limited by some rejecting Christ’s sacrifice on their behalf. The inheritance left by the deceased is not reduced in value because some heirs refuse their share.
• To take some passages that give clear declarations that salvation is for all, for the world, for whosoever, for all Israel, for any man, for everyone that believes, etc., and apply them to only the elect, when there is no clear reason to interpret it in that way, is to deliberately change God’s Word. Do only the elect go astray like lost sheep? Do only the elect thirst? Are only the elect ungodly and sinners? Are only the elect “under sin”? Of course not. As surely as all men are sinners and have, like all of Israel, gone astray like lost sheep, so surely were the sins of all men laid upon Christ, and salvation is available to all through faith in Him.
• People who believe in limited atonement use John 12:19. Of course, the “whole world” wasn’t at Jesus’s triumphal entry, but it’s just making a point that Jesus was popular. Their argument is, “look when John uses the word ‘world’ he doesn’t mean everybody, but it’s just an expression to mean a limited group.” According to James Barr (in his book The Semantics of Biblical Language), you cannot legitimately take the same word, that’s used in a different context, and read the meaning of that word into your present context when the present context doesn’t support the meaning of that word. This is called “illegitimate totality transfer.” People who believe in “limited atonement” are making this error with the word “world.” It’s a major error to find the word “world” in some different context where the context shrinks the meaning of the word, and then develop that meaning and read it into every use of the word “world” in the entire Bible.
• So, In John 12:19 “world” does indeed mean “world” in a limited sense, but “world” doesn’t have this limited sense in John 1:29 or 3:16. Plus, it doesn’t even make sense that “the world” in John 3:16 means “the elect,” because the so-called elect have never been in danger from perishing and never can be. John 3:14-15 explains John 3:16 (and in verse 14-15, “the elect” doesn’t make sense), and John 3:19 defines the world as “men.”
NON-EXCLUSIVE VERSES
• The passages Matthew 20:28, John 10:15; Acts 20:28; Ephesians 5:25 are called “non-exclusive verses” In other words, they’re simply making a statement of what something Christ’s death did accomplish, but they’re not saying that’s all Christ’s death accomplished.
SUMMARY OF THE BIBLICAL VIEW OF THE ATONEMENT
Messiah Jesus died for the entire world, but His death is only effective to those who believe in the gospel and place their faith in Him. In other words, Jesus’s death made salvation potentially possible for everyone (Is 53:6; Lk 19:10; Jn 1:29; 3:16-17; 4:42; 8:12; Rom 5:6, 18; 1 Tim 4:10; Heb 2:9; 2 Pet 2:1; 1 Jn 2:2), but only those who hear the gospel of Christ and place their faith in Him find the atonement efficacious for them (Jn 10:11, 15; 15:13; Acts 20:28; Rom 8:32-35; Eph 5:25-27; Heb 9:28). We are commanded to proclaim the Gospel to all human beings (Matt 28:19; Acts 1:8; cf. 17:30; Titus 2:11; 2 Pet 3:9). Salvation is potentially possible and available to all, but it becomes actual only for the elect. A distinction should be made between the provisional benefits of the Messiah’s death and the appropriation of those blessings by the elect. The provision is unlimited, but the application of it is limited. Many will be unwilling to receive the gospel and will reject the offer of salvation, so the benefits of the Messiah’s death are not applied to them (Jn 5:40; cf. Matt 23:37).
CONNECTION BETWEEN UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION AND LIMITED ATONEMENT
Please understand, the dogma of Unconditional Election lies as a foundation of doctrinal support for the teaching of limited atonement. Traditional Calvinism teaches that since God determined only a select number of people to be elect and destined for salvation, it would be superfluous for Christ to purchase the salvation of the nonelect when He died for sin on Calvary’s cross. Based on this, you can see how the “U” and “L” of TULIP are connected. For more information about a critique of the Calvinist’s “unconditional election,” please see the following “Ask Pastor David” posts: March 29, 2019, August 21, 2019, and August 22, 2019.
Summary and Conclusion
(1) If the statements of the New Testament are taken at face value, then it is evident they teach Christ died for everyone.
(2) Limited atonement is not based on exegesis of the texts of Scripture but more on the logical but incorrect premise that if Christ died for everyone and everyone is not saved, then God’s plan is thwarted.
(3) The world, as John describes it, is indeed those who hate God, reject Christ, and who are dominated by Satan. Yet that is the world for which Christ died (cf. John 1:29; 3:16, 17; 4:42; 1 John 4:14). These passages emphasize a universal atonement.
(4) The word whosoever is used more than 110 times in the New Testament and always with an unrestricted meaning (cf. John 3:16; Acts 2:21; 10:43; Rom. 10:13; Rev. 22:17).
(5) The word all, or an equivalent term, is used to denote everyone. Christ died for the ungodly—everyone is ungodly (Rom. 5:6); Christ died for all, suggesting everyone (2 Cor 5:14–15; 1 Tim 2:6; 4:10; Titus 2:11; Heb 2:9; 2 Peter 3:9).
(6) 2 Peter 2:1 states Christ died for the false teachers who were “denying the Master who bought them.” The context indicates these are heretics doomed to destruction, yet it is said of them that “the Master … bought them.” This argues against the limited atonement view.
(7) The Bible teaches that Christ died for “sinners” (1 Tim 1:15; Rom 5:6–8). The word “sinners” never means “church” or “the elect,” but simply all of lost mankind.” It should be obvious, that if the apostle John in his gospel in 3:16 had intended to say that God loves the “elect” and not “the world,” he would have written that. He knew the Greek word for “elect,” but he chose to say “world,” and that’s exactly what He meant.
(8) The Bible distinguishes between the universal provision and the individual application of the Atonement.
I agree with Robert Lightner, that the question of the extent of Christ’s work on the cross directly relates to the gospel message we are commanded to share with unbelievers. They must believe that Christ died for them, in their place, as their substitute. If Calvinism is correct that Christ didn’t die for all, it would be dishonest to tell all indiscriminately that Christ died for them when in actuality He only died for the elect. Those who believe in limited atonement can’t honestly personalize the Gospel. Every person on the planet has sinned in Adam and stands before God guilty, but if limited atonement is true (and it isn’t true), Christ did not die for every sinner. What brings salvation to every sinner is not their belief that Christ, in general, died for sinners, but that He died for them and paid the debt they owed.
Sources Used
Anderson, David R. Free Grace Soteriology: 3rd Edition. Grace Theology Press, 88.
Badger, Anthony B. Confronting Calvinism: A Free Grace Refutation and Biblical Resolution of Radical Reformed Soteriology, 216-219.
Chay, Fred; Anderson, David R.; Dillow, Joseph; Wilson, Ken; Tanner, Paul. A Defense of Free Grace Theology: With Respect to Saving Faith, Perseverance, and Assurance. Grace Theology Press.
Enns, Paul P. The Moody Handbook of Theology, Revised & Expanded. Moody Publishers, 2014.
Gear, Spencer. “Did John Calvin believe in limited atonement?” < https://truthchallenge.one/blog/2012/08/31/did-john-calvin-believe-in-limited-atonement-3/>.
Hunt, Dave. What Love is This? Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God, 3rd Edition. Bend, OR: The Berean Call, 2006.
Lightner, Robert P. Sin, the Savior, and Salvation: The Theology of Everlasting Life. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1991.
Olson, C. Gordon. Beyond Calvinism & Arminianism: An Inductive Mediate Theology of Salvation. 3rd Edition Expanded, Revised, & Updated. Global Gospel Publishers, chapter 21.
________. Getting the Gospel Right: A Balanced View of Salvation Truth, chapter 16.
Palmer, Edwin H. The Five Points of Calvinism. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1972, 44.
Rhodes Ron. “The Extent of the Atonement: Limited Atonement Versus Unlimited Atonement.” Chafer Theological Seminary Journal (volumes 2:2 and 2:3, Fall 1996 and Winter 1996).
Stegall, Thomas L. Must Faith Endure for Salvation to Be Sure?: A Biblical Study of the Perseverance versus Preservation of the Saints, Chapter 3. Grace Gospel Press.
Vance, Laurence M. The Other Side of Calvinism. Pensacola, FL: Vance Publications, 1999.
Woods, Andy. Soteriology Teaching, Session 3. < http://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/Soteriology_by_Andy_Woods/03_Atonement/index.htm?x=x>.