The third representation in the word T.U.L.I.P. is described as Limited Atonement. Some prefer to call it Definite Atonement or Particular Redemption. This doctrine is, among the five points of Calvinism, the most difficult for many to digest. It just rubs against our religious grain to consider that Jesus Christ's death was on behalf of a particular number and not for all mankind. I remember a conversation with a man who was upset with this teaching and he said, "I want my children to be saved. I just can't abide the idea that some are chosen to salvation and some are not!" He didn't realize it, of course, but what he was actually saying is that he believed his influence and his instruction to his children would be the determining factor in whether or not they would be saved! He was, in fact, not trusting God to meet his desire. I knew another man, who had been in the ministry in holiness churches for a number of years, who would get physically sick for that same reason. So, admittedly this is difficult for some people but it is, nevertheless, Biblical teaching. Before we address this doctrine let me do a little review of what we have covered thus far. When I say covered I don't mean that we have in any way exhausted the discussion. I often think that most writers who talk about these things give far more information than their readers are able to digest so when I use the word "covered" I mean it relatively!
We have talked about Total Depravity or Total Inability and we found that all are born sinners. In fact, all are "dead in trespasses and sins" and are "without God" , "without Christ", and "having no hope" unless God works a miracle of regeneration or "spiritual quickening". So we determined that because of this inability to "change our spots" so to speak, we have no hope of salvation except for the insinuation of God.
We also spoke of Unconditional Election by which is meant that God, being no respecter of persons, selects those of His choice without any consideration of merit, to reap the benefits of His saving grace. We found that God will have mercy on those Whom He chooses and He will pass over, all others giving them their just deserts, rather than saving by His Grace (Romans 9). In the case of Pharaoh we are told that he was raised up for the distinct purpose of demonstrating God's justice.
So, since man is incapable of saving himself. And since because of being "dead" spiritually, he is incapable of working towards salvation, and since He can in no way influence God Who is no respecter of persons it necessarily follows that there is a limited redemption. By using the word limited we do not mean that the sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice is in question for we all understand that the precious blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is sufficient for the salvation of all men. By using the word "limited" we mean that a limited number of souls are in view as the recipients of Christ's offering.
There are basically three views we can take:- That Christ's death was an actual atonement for all men, and so all men will be saved. This of course is rejected because we all know all men will not be saved. This idea is called Universalism.
- That Christ's death does not actually save anyone, but makes it possible for all if they will co-operate with God. This is the most popular view among Christians today. So Christ's death provides the basis for salvation but that Christ cannot save apart from the correct response from the sinner.
- That Christ's death is an actual atonement for a limited number of the elect and that Christ's offering is both sufficient and efficient. In this view Christ actually saves his elect and they are not cooperative, but are saved by Grace through Faith.
Of course it is this last view that we hold dear here. I like to say that when I sing "Jesus Saves, Jesus Saves" I really mean it! We know that John's Gospel teaches that there are those, who are considered separate from the world, whom God the Father has given the Son. And of these that the Father gives the Son, each will come to Jesus, having been drawn of the Father, and of which none shall be lost, and in fact, without the loss of a single one, will be raised up at the last day! (See John 6) By this chapter alone we know that there are some who are separated from others. That some belong to the Father and will be given to the Son. This means that there is a limited number who are set aside for Christ.
The question then is, "For whom did Christ die?" and some will readily answer, "For all men.", which presents several problems:
- If we take a verse like "He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?" (Romans 8:32) for instance we immediately have a problems. For one, the use of the word "for" which, in most cases will either mean because of or on the behalf of or in the place of and we must determine by either the context or the particular word used to make our determination. The word in question is the Greek word huper which carries two intrinsic meanings: 1.In the place of; 2. For the benefit of, and these two cannot be divided. The second problem is that we must seek out whether the "all" means all without exception or whether it means all of a specific number. At this point I will add two quotes from David Huckabee from his study on the word "all". First, "'All' is another good Bible word that is seriously misunderstood by many students of Scripture, for most people assume that it is a word that is totally unlimited, but such is not the case at all. Not only is it not unlimited in its meaning in some of its usages, it is not absolutely unlimited in any of its usages, and to think so is to show a tragic ignorance of its grammatical usage." and the second, "Always and without exception "all" modifies a noun, pronoun, verb, adjective or adverb, and is limited to that word, and it is never used with "men" in a salvation context." (Davis Huckabee, Studies In Strong Doctrine, Appendix 4) If we use words like for and all properly we will not fall into the trap of using it to mean all without exception or totally unlimited.
- The second word that is almost always misunderstood is the word world. Again, it is pointed out that there are at least fourteen different usages of the word world in the Bible. In John's gospel the word world (kosmos) is used in at least three different applications so when we get to a verse like "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16) we will run into serious contradictions if we take the world to mean all mankind, for clearly it cannot mean that. Again, "And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world." (John 12:47) we find that for the world to apply to every man is simply not acceptable! We'll note that there is a distinction between the world and Christ's elect, for instance, "Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. " (John 13:1). I could go on but I simply want the reader to know that study is necessary.
Charles Spurgeon, Defender of Limited Atonement The next thing we must consider is the implications of words like propitiation. When we use the word propitiation we mean, basically, that the justice of God has been satisfied by the atoning sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus was, not only the Person, but also the Place of propitiation when He paid the full penalty for the sins of His elect, and God's wrath was propitiated. In other words God accepted Christ's payment on behalf of His elect. This is important because if we say that Christ's sacrifice was for (on behalf of and in the place of) all men, then we find ourselves right back to universalism. Even in our court system a man cannot be tried for the same crime twice! If Christ died on behalf of all men and all men benefit eternally from His death, then would God not be unjust to condemn unbelievers when their sins have been taken away?
I will be the first to admit that there are some verses that seem, upon a surface reading, to imply that Christ's death was for all men but if we still to context, and if we investigate the usage of words like all, we will find that in every case, the meaning becomes clear. So, does all men mean all men without exception? or does it mean all (all kinds of) men? or does it mean all of a particular group? and that is the question to be solved! See for instance 1 Timothy 2:1-4 where the context clearly means "all kinds", not just poor and disadvantaged, but kings as well. Another example is 2 Peter 3:9 where God promises that not a single one of His elect will perish. There is absolutely no way we can make this to me all men!
You may ask, "What then does 'whosoever' will mean?" It means just exactly what it says! You see, as I explained under Total Depravity, when God regenerates His elect, gives them the gift of faith, He also makes them willing! (We'll talk about his more under Irresistible Grace). So we have no argument with "whosoever will", in fact, it shows God's election in changing the wills because most men WON'T!
Due to my own rule about keeping these posts simple I must contain my remarks. So, as we look at these doctrines we must agree that they all work together in a synergistic way. To reject any of these first three doctrines that I have talked about is to confuse the whole. The same can be said of the two to follow. I rejoice in the sovereignty and wisdom of God, and I am glad to receive both His mercy and His grace. Moreover, I am glad to know that He has chosen me, not from any merit found within me, but according to His own will and purpose. Will you trust Jesus Christ to be your Savior today? Will you admit yourself a sinner in need of the Blessed Saviour? All of the benefits of God's grace can be yours today if you will be a "whosoever". My hope is that God will bless!
No comments:
Post a Comment