Today is Good Friday, often associated with the crucifixion of Jesus. Some people still continue to argue for a Thursday crucifixion (literally 72 hours) or even a Wednesday Crucifixion (which is four days instead). A controversial doctrine of TULIP is limited atonement. It really can be controversial because limited atonement is often said it limits the atonement. It’s viewed as cruel because we have the tendency to believe Jesus died for the whole world but you must receive the free gift of salvation. Yes, the atonement is available for everyone but only those who receive it will benefit from it.
The late Robert C. Sproul Sr. speaks of what limited is about:
The doctrine of limited atonement (also known as “definite atonement” or “particular redemption”) says that the atonement of Christ was limited (in its scope and aim) to the elect; Jesus did not atone for the sins of everybody in the world. In my denomination, we examine young men going into the ministry, and invariably somebody will ask a student, “Do you believe in limited atonement?” The student will respond by saying, “Yes, I believe that the atonement of Christ is sufficient for all and efficient for some,” meaning the value of Christ’s death on the cross was great enough to cover all of the sins of every person that ever lived, but that it applies only to those who put their faith in Christ. However, that statement doesn’t get at the real heart of the controversy, which has to do with God’s purpose in the cross.
There are basically two ways in which to understand God’s eternal plan. One understanding is that, from all eternity, God had a desire to save as many people as possible out of the fallen human race, so He conceived a plan of redemption by which He would send His Son into the world as the sin-bearer for fallen people. Jesus would go to the cross and die for all who would at some point put their trust in Him. So the plan was provisional—God provided atonement for all who take advantage of it, for all who believe. The idea is that Jesus died potentially for everybody, but that it is theoretically possible that the whole thing was in vain because every last person in the world might reject the work of Jesus and choose to remain dead in their trespasses and sins. Thus, God’s plan could be frustrated because nobody might take advantage of it. This is the prevailing view in the church today—that Jesus died for everybody provisionally. In the final analysis, whether salvation happens depends on each individual person.
The Reformed view understands God’s plan differently. It says that God, from all eternity, devised a plan that was not provisional. It was a plan “A” with no plan “B” to follow if it didn’t work. Under this plan, God decreed that He would save a certain number of people out of fallen humanity, people whom the Bible calls the elect. In order for that plan of election to work out in history, He sent His Son into the world with the specific aim and design to accomplish redemption for the elect. This was accomplished perfectly, without a drop of the blood of Christ being wasted. Everyone whom the Father chose for salvation will be saved through the atonement.
The message, often said, is Jesus died for you. We say, “Either you receive it, or is of no effect.” The rest of the text of Sproul Sr. also concludes with this one:
The implication of the non-Reformed view is that God doesn’t know in advance who is going to be saved. For this reason, there are theologians today saying, “God saves as many people as He possibly can.” How many people can God save? How many people does He have the power to save? If He is really God, He has the power to save all of them. How many people does He have the authority to save? Cannot God intervene in anyone’s life, just as He did in Moses’ life, Abraham’s life, or the Apostle Paul’s life, to bring them into a saving relationship with Him? He certainly has the right to do that.
We cannot deny that the Bible speaks about Jesus dying for “the world.” John 3:16 is the premier example of a verse that uses this language. But there is a counterbalancing perspective in the New Testament, including John’s Gospel, that tells us Jesus laid down His life not for everyone but for His sheep. Here in John’s Gospel, Jesus speaks about His sheep as those whom the Father has given Him.
In John 6, we see that Jesus said, “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him” (John 6:44), and the word translated as “draws” properly means “compels.” Jesus also said in that chapter, “All that the Father gives me will come to me” (John 6:37). His point was that everyone whom the Father designed to come to His Son would come, and no one else. Thus, your salvation, from start to finish, rests on the sovereign decree of God, who decided, in His grace, to have mercy on you, not because of anything He saw in you that demanded it, but for the love of the Son. The only reason I can give under heaven why I’m a Christian is because I’m a gift of the Father to the Son, not because of anything I’ve ever done or could do.
I remembered believing (back then) that God is trying to save as many as He can. Why is it that I’ve got unsaved loved ones who heard the Gospel before I did? I have folks who have finally understood my conversion to Christianity. However, most of them are still unsaved today. Instead, we need to understand John 6 to furthe understand the drawing power of God the Father.
It would start to make sense when you start to look at the sequence of TULIP. Man is totally depraved (or unable) that while we can be humanly good, the best is not enough, and no one can choose God. Unconditional election says that God has elected someone to salvation. No, it’s not about being born saved but rather, a person is unsaved, on their way to Hell, and then God calls that person from the path of Hell to Heaven. The atonement is limited only to those who will believe. The atonement is available for all but only a few will receive it.
Richard Philipins from Ligonier Ministeries also mentions “What’s So Great About Limited Atonement?”:
First, whenever a doctrine receives the prominence the Bible gives to Christ’s atonement, it must be significant to our lives.
The solemnity of the subject matter of Christ’s atonement urges us to consider it of great significance and to think carefully about it, in conformity with the Scriptures. In this respect, limited atonement should be received as a great doctrine simply because of its importance to Jesus and His saving work.
Second, if we grasp how personal in its application and how efficacious in its effects is the cross of Christ, we will find solid ground for our assurance of salvation.
There can be no assurance if the ultimate cause of our redemption is found in ourselves. The Arminian concept of a universal atonement, Packer remarks, “destroys the Scriptural ground of assurance altogether. . . . My salvation, on this view, depends not on what Christ did for me, but on what I subsequently do for myself.” This is why assurance of salvation is a field of theology and Christian experience plowed only by the Reformed. Murray notes, “It is no wonder that the doctrine of assurance should have found its true expression in that theology which is conditioned by the thought of the divine atonement or effective redemption, the irreversibility of effectual calling, and the immutability of the gifts of grace.
It is when you realize that even your faith is the outworking of Christ’s saving death for you, by the electing will of the Father, as applied by the Spirit, that you know the solid ground on which your salvation stands. If you truly believe–and the Bible gives you tests to determine whether you do–you can rest your heart in God’s sovereign grace and begin looking forward to an eternity of glory in the kingdom that you are now called to serve.
Lastly, limited atonement impacts us powerfully with regard to the psychology of our devotion to the Lord.
There are some who die for principles, and we admire them for it. Socrates accepted the cup of hemlock for the principle of tacit consent to civic rule. For this, his influence has spread far and wide across the ages. There are others who die for causes. If we share the cause, we may honor the martyr’s name. Nathan Hale has gone down in American history as the revolutionary who declared, “I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country.” Schoolchildren are taught those words even today, and we remember him with respect. Logically, the doctrine of universal atonement places Jesus in this category, though as the most noble of people who died for the greatest possible cause.
But there is another category of devotion that rises far above the rest. Some die for principles and others for causes. But what about someone who dies for me? This calls for a different kind of devotion altogether.
The movie Saving Private Ryan tells of a rescue operation immediately after the Allied invasion of Normandy in June 1944. The War Department learns that three out of four sons in a family named Ryan have died in battle on the same day. The Army’s top general orders that the fourth son be rescued from behind German lines, where he parachuted on D-Day. An elite squad of Army Rangers is assigned to find Private Ryan. The search leads to a bridge where German tanks are trying to break through Allied lines, and there the squad is destroyed as the quest finally succeeds. As the captain who saved Ryan lies dying on the bridge, surrounded by the bodies of the men from his squad, he draws Ryan close and gasps: “Earn this. Earn it.” The movie concludes with Ryan, as an old man, returning to the cemetery where the men who died for him were buried. Falling to his knees at Captain Miller’s grave, he says to the white plaster cross: “Every day I think about what you said to me that day on the bridge. I’ve tried to live my life the best I could. I hope that was enough. I hope that at least in your eyes, I earned what all of you have done for me.” Turning to his wife, who comes up beside him, he stammers: “Tell me I have led a good life. Tell me I’m a good man.”
We praise God that we are not required to earn what Christ has done for us, for we never could do so. We receive His death by simple faith alone. Jesus never demands that we earn what He did for us. But the Bible does tell us to live “in a manner worthy of the Lord” (Col. 1:10). So we can turn to His wooden cross every day and pray, “If, with all Your glory, You, the Son of God, died for me, then I can live for You.” We live not merely for a principle and not even for a great cause. We live for a person, the Lord Jesus Christ. He died not merely for a principle or even for the greatest of causes. He died for us. So every Christian can say, “I live for Him, because He died for me.” He died for me.
Not one drop of blood was shed in vain on the cross. John 10 teaches that Jesus lays down His life for His sheep. While the atonement can save anyone, not everyone will receive it. Who will receive the atonement but only those who put their trust? Who will receive Jesus as Lord and Savior if nobody seeks God? This is where the atonement is limited. It’s only limited to those who respond to the call of salvation.
Even more, Charles H. Spurgeon, a preacher admired by both Calvinists and non-Calvinists, also said these about limited atonement:
We do not believe that Christ made any effectual atonement for those who are forever damned; we dare not think that the blood of Christ was ever shed with the intention of saving those whom God foreknew never could be saved, and some of whom were even in Hell when Christ, according to some men’s account, died to save them.
We say Christ so died that He infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ’s death not only may be saved but are saved, must be saved, and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved. You are welcome to your atonement; you may keep it. We will never renounce ours for the sake of it.
I would rather believe a limited atonement that is efficacious for all men for whom it was intended, than a universal atonement that is not efficacious for anybody, except the will of men be joined with it.” Simply put, he held “that Christ came into the world not to put men into a salvable state, but into a saved state.
This Good Friday, we understand for whom did Christ die. We tell people Christ died for sins. Only the elect can respond to the message of salvation. The only thing to do is to preach and God does the choosing.
Reformed Baptist Christian Blogger 