The Atonement of Christ
 

What did Jesus’s work on the cross truly accomplish? Many people who profess Christ as their Lord and Savior had to think about this question at one point in their life. Some people may simply say that Jesus’s death on the cross accomplished one’s sins to be forgiven. Others may give more detail by saying that Jesus’s death secured the salvation of all who would ever believe because He provided atonement for their sins, He satisfied the wrath of God for the penalty of one’s sins and because of His resurrection, He defeated death, sin, and the devil. While both answers are correct, theologians have developed specific modes, models, or theories of atonement that speak to the details of what Christ truly accomplished by His death on the cross. Atonement can be defined as a way of reconciliation between God and humankind through the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ (Merriam-Webster, 2003; Trotter, 1996; Yarbrough, 2000). Moving forward, a survey of four popular atonement models will be outlined, the historical background will be given for each model, and what each model accomplished through that mode of atonement. In addition, the very debatable doctrine of Limited Atonement will also be analyzed. 

Christus Victor Model

The first mode of atonement is called Christus Victor which was held by most of the early church fathers of Christianity (Berg, 2016; Bird, 2013). This model focuses on the kingly aspect of Jesus’s identity and states that due to the fall of humankind, all people became subject to demonic control (“Lecture 1,” 2016). The model continues to state that through the death of Jesus on the cross, Jesus gained victory over death, the devil, and evil (Berg, 2016; Bird, 2013). With this atonement model, Jesus is victorious over all the dark powers that enslave the people of God (Bird, 2013). The Christus Victor model was developed to further elaborate on the apostle’s creed where it stated that Jesus descended into Hell. “Early commentators such as Gregory of Nyssa, Julius Firmicus Maternus, the Gospel of Nicodemus, and Eusebius interpreted Psalm 24 as indicative of Christ’s actions during the time between His death and resurrection” (Bauckham, 1992; Hiehle, 2016).

Scripture Support

Theologians are not short on Scripture proof when explaining this model of atonement. Christ’s victory over death is found in Peter’s first epistle which shows that new life is offered to the Christian as a result of Jesus’s resurrection (Henderson, 2016). The apostle Paul proclaims Christ as the victor in many of his epistles, and one of them speaks specifically of death being “swallowed up in victory” due to Christ’s death and resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:54; Henderson, 2016). Moreover, another epistle demonstrates, because of Christ’s death, Satan will be destroyed by Christ and it is Jesus who will be the victor (Hebrews 2:14). Other Scriptures can be noted to prove this model further, but another model that has gained attention is the Satisfaction model.

The Satisfaction model

The Satisfaction model was built on themes from Augustine of Hippo’s theology but is primarily associated with St. Anselm (Bird, 2013; “Lecture 1,” 2016). This model thinks of Jesus’s atonement in priestly terms and states that human beings owe a debt of honor toward God (Bird, 2013; Erickson, 2013; “Lecture 1,” 2016). Jesus’s death is a means of how restitution, or a gift that makes up for the offense, that in which is sin be made as an alternative punishment (Berg, 2016). Anselm of Canterbury (1939) states:

This is the debt which man and angel owe to God, and no one who pays this debt commits sin; but everyone who does not pay it sins. This is justice, or uprightness of will, which makes a being just or upright in heart, that is, in will; and this is the sole and complete debt of honor which we owe to God, and which God requires of us. He who does not render this honor which is due to God, robs God of his own and dishonors him; and this is sin. (Deane, 1939, p. 202)

This payment of infinite value could only be paid for by Jesus Christ who lived a perfect life obedient to all that the Father commanded Him to do and totally honored God in every way (Brid, 2013). It is Jesus who voluntarily pays the satisfaction that humankind is unable to pay and takes full responsibility of their crimes which deems one sinless (Bird, 2013). Although this model was quite popular with the Reformers, this model comes with criticism and offers no solution for Christ suffering for the penalty of one’s sins (Berkhof, 1938). Furthermore, this model was developed in a feudalistic society where honor and shame took precedence over guilt and innocence (Bird, 2013; “Lecture 1,” 2016). This particular model’s primary passage of support can be found in the apostle Paul’s letter to Thessalonica. “Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Thessalonians 5:23; Hebrews 9:14).

The Exemplar Model

Moving on to the third primary mode of atonement, the Exemplar Theory. This theory was invented in the sixteenth century by the Socinians which was to rival the Reformers doctrine that Christ vicariously atoned for the sins of humankind (Berkhof, 1938; Grudem, 2004). This model for atonement denies that God’s justice requires payment for sin but rather Christ’s death on the cross provides people only an example of how they should trust and obey God (Grudem, 2004). Sin is not pardoned or punished nor is the wrath of God satisfied in this atonement model (Berkhof, 1938). Berkhof (1938) goes on to say:

Christ saves men by revealing to them the way of faith and obedience as the way of eternal life, by giving them an example of true obedience both in His life and in His death, and by inspiring them to lead a similar life. (p. 387)

This mode of atonement tries to stir up an old heresy called Pelagianism which denied the human depravity of humankind and asserted that humans could somehow save themselves from eternal judgment (Berkhof, 1938).

Scripture Support

The primary scripture that exemplar theorists have to support this model is found in 1 Peter 2:21, “For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps.” If the theory was slightly modified to instead proclaim that because of Christ’s death, Christians are compelled to do good works and be more like Jesus; this would be Biblical. Many scriptures are given to prove the point that Jesus’s death has both redemptive and transformative effect on believers (Bird, 2013). Paul tells Titus that, Christ “gave Himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works” (Titus 2:14). In Romans, Paul tells the believers that because of Christ’s death, they can offer their bodies as “instruments of righteousness” and also “bear fruit for God” (Romans 6:13; 7:4). Instead, this theory further claims that humankind can justify themselves by merely living out the example of Christ which has no warrant in scripture.

The Penal Substitution model

The final model of atonement that is perhaps the most accepted among evangelicals is called the Penal Substitution model (“Lecture 1,” 2016). The Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin held to this mode of atonement while other modern theological giants such as Charles Hodge and J.I. Packer held fast to the Penal Substitution model as well (Bird, 2013). The first word penal describes how Christ took upon Himself the wrath of God for the penalty of one’s sins and the term substitution refers to Christ voluntarily surrendering His life to die in humanities place (Bird, 2013; Grudem, 2004). Jesus paid the penalty for all who would ever believe in Him, and He is believers substitute or the archetype of the Old Testament scapegoat and sacrificial system (Berkhof, 1938; Grudem, 2004). This particular view of atonement is also known as Vicarious Atonement. The term vicar describes someone who takes place or represents another person. Jesus’s death was, therefore, vicarious because He stood in our place as our representative and then took the penalty that was due unto us (Berkhof, 1938; Bird, 2013; Grudem, 2004). John Calvin (2011) sums up this model beautifully:

Scripture teaches, that [humanity] was estranged from God by sin, an heir of wrath, exposed to the curse of eternal death, excluded from all hope of salvation, a complete alien from the blessing of God, the slave of Satan, captive under the yoke of sin; in fine, doomed to horrible destruction, and already involved in it; that then Christ interposed, took the punishment upon himself and bore what by the just judgment of God was impending over sinners; with his own blood expiated the sins which rendered them hateful to God, by this expiation satisfied and duly propitiated God the Father, by this intercession appeased his anger, on this basis founded peace between God and men, and by this tie secured the Divine benevolence toward them. (Vol 1, p. 505)

In this model of atonement, humankind is destined for Hell. Due to the inheritance of sin from Adam, humanity deserves to die for the penalty of sin; they deserve God’s wrath against sin, they are separated from God because of sin and are in complete bondage to sin (Grudem, 2004). Through Christ’s voluntary penal substitution; He sacrificed Himself for us (Hebrews 9:26), He reconciled us back to God (2 Corinthians 5:18-19), He redeemed His people out of bondage (Mark 10:45), and finally Christ became the propitiation for believers’ sins (1 John 4:10). It is Jesus who was able to solve all the problems of sin through His death on the cross. 

Scripture Support

In the Old Testament the entire Levitical priesthood and sacrificial system by blood were built on substitution models that expiated sins and brought Israel back into a relationship in which they could worship God again (Leviticus 4:15; 16:21; 17:11; Numbers 8:12). This is why Christ’s death is also referred to as a Passover sacrifice (1 Corinthians 5:7; Exodus 12:13). Garland (2003) drives this point home by saying, “as God saved Israel in Egypt through the sacrifice of the Passover lamb, God now saves all people through the sacrifice of Jesus” (p. 180) Jesus is also the archetype of the suffering servant spoken of by the prophet Isaiah in the Old Testament (Isaiah 53). This servant is the one who would bore our suffering, the one who would take upon Himself the iniquity of us all, the one whom the LORD would cause to suffer, and was pierced for our transgressions (Isaiah 53:4-12). All of these scriptures show that Christ had to take upon Himself the penalty of our sins through His death (1 Peter 2:22-25; Bird, 2013; Hebrews 9:28; John 1:29; Luke 22:37; Mark 14:24; Romans 4:25). From the beginning of Genesis to the end in Revelation, scripture clearly teaches that sin must be paid for and that blood must be shed to restore man’s relationship back to a Holy God. Jesus is the one who fulfilled all of these requirements in the Penal Substitution model. 

Throughout Church history, many theologians have tried to come up with a specific model of atonement that describes precisely what Christ accomplished through the cross. The most famous being Christus Victor, Satisfaction, Exemplar, and Penal Substitution models. All of these models have their strengths and scriptural support, but some find themselves lacking when one tries to dig deep into the Word. Perhaps a blend of all of the models is what best describes the goal and accomplishment of Jesus’s death on the cross. A combination of all of these models would be comparable to this. Due to Jesus’s perfect life, He was able to offer up a sacrifice to God that was satisfying to Him. Jesus died in our place as our substitute since this was the only way to restore humanity back to a Holy God. Christ is now pronounced the Victor of death, evil, and the devil by His resurrection confirming that the sacrifice He offered to God was satisfactory. Now, believers can live a life of obedience and goodness because Jesus has sent the Spirit of God to be in them to help them be victorious in every good work until He returns! Finally, at the very least, one can know for sure this: Jesus accomplished all that the Father wanted to achieve at the cross of Calvary.

Limited Atonement

The doctrine of limited atonement affirms that the Bible teaches Christ’s atoning work on the cross was done with a definite purpose in mind—to redeem for God people from every tribe, tongue and nation (Revelation 5:9). Jesus died, according Matthew 1:21, to “save His people from their sins.” This truth is seen in many passages throughout Scripture. In John 10:15 we see that He lays “down His life for the sheep.” Who are the sheep? They are the people chosen by God from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4). These are the same ones Jesus said were given to Him by the Father in order that He would fulfill the Father’s will by losing none of them and by raising all of them up in the last day (John 6:37-40). This truth that Jesus came for this specific reason is seen in both the Old and New Testaments.

This is true unconditional love, a salvation that is by grace alone in Christ alone. Christ plus nothing equals salvation. Atonement so sufficient that it secures everything necessary for salvation including the faith that God gives us to believe (Ephesians 2:8).

Problems with a Potential Atonement for All

1. Wasted atonement –If Christ died for every person in the whole world and its up to them to just pick up this atonement after they believe or receive it, then you have billions of people who did not and the atonement of Christ has been wasted. We have to remember how can a spiritually dead man do anything without the power of God enabling them.

2.  Potential Salvation not an actual salvation - If it is potential it is not activated until you believe. It's a matter of them coming, pastors or people convincing them to believe. It's up to the sinner to activate it! Atonement of Jesus sin is unlimited but if it is the sinner can neutralize it. It actually is God who limits the atonement to His extent, He didn’t choose everyone.  I believe the Bible teaches it is limited to his extent but unlimited to its effect. For us it was a full and complete atonement.

3.  Hell - is full of people who sins were paid for in full whom Christ died for. This makes absolutely no sense at all. An important aspect of a believer’s assurance is that God is righteous and that He will not nor cannot punish sin twice. Therefore the sin that is covered by Christ’s blood can never be charged to the sinners account. Yet that is what a universal atonement leads to. Christ is punished for the sins of those that are not saved and then they are also punished in hell for the same sins. Gods wrath was satisfied fully for occupants of Hell who are dammed for all eternity... does that sound right to you?

4. Barrier - That is to say the death of Jesus Christ then is not an actual atonement; it is only a potential atonement.  He really did not purchase salvation for anyone in particular.  He only removed some kind of barrier to make it possible for sinners to choose to be saved. God’s purpose in the atonement was that Jesus would secure forever the salvation of those the Father had given to Him (Hebrews 7:25). Therefore while Christ’s atonement was limited in its intent or purpose, it was unlimited in its power.

5.  Universalism - believes everyone is going to heaven. We known the atonement is limited. We know not everyone is going to heaven. Even the person who believes that Christ died for everyone believes that. How is it limited? Because not everyone is saved only those who believe and confess him as lord are saved. You will start to run into a problem though if you believe in potential atonement when it comes to universalism. Here are just a few verses to show you that people are going to Hell.

• Matthew 10:28 - do not fear those who kill the body...fear him who can destroy

• Luke 12 - It tells me there are going to be people in Hell.

• Mark 9:43 - go into hell...verse 48 also

• John 8:12 - I am the light of the world he who follows me!!! It is limited to those who follow Christ.

• John 3:17 - he who does believe is already judged.

• Matthew 22:13 - weeping and mashing of teeth. 25:30 - same thing

• 2 Thessalonians 1:7 - dealing out retribution paying destruction.

All of this goes back to the doctrine of inability. Man/Women can't make it.  Man/Women cannot make that choice, all people...all people are sinners and all sinners are dead in their trespasses and sins, all of them are alienated from the life of God, all do only evil continually, all are unwilling and unable to understand, to repent and to believe, all have darkened minds, blinded by sin and Satan, all have hearts that are full of evil, all are wicked, desperately wicked, all desire only the will of their father who is Satan, all of them are unable to seek God, and they are all trapped in absolute inability and unwillingness. So how then can the sinner make the choice? The sinner on his own cannot understand, cannot repent, and cannot believe.

• John 1:12 - But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

• Ephesians 2:8 - For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

• 1 Corinthians 1:30 - But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, so that, just as it is written, "LET HIM WHO BOASTS, BOAST IN THE LORD."

These are just a few of God ordained and God induced. They will only be saved if God saves them. Which ties into to the Doctrine of election.

One point I love though that Mark Driscoll makes is this. Driscoll mentions 1 Timothy 4:10 says savior of all people and if you keep reading it says and especially those who believe. So is it both?

Church Leaders that support Limited Atonement

John Owen (1600’s) - “The Father imposed His wrath due unto, and the Son underwent punishment for, either:

1. All the sins of all men

2. All the sins of some men

3. Some of the sins of all men

In which case it may be said:

1. That if the last be true, all men have some sins to answer for, and so, none are saved

2. That if the second be true, then Christ, in their stead suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the whole world, and this is the truth

3. But if the first be the case, why are not all men free from the punishment due unto their sins? You answer, "Because of unbelief." I ask, is this unbelief a sin, or is it not? If it be, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or He did not. If He did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which He died? If He did not, He did not die for all their sins!" [The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, Book 3 Ch. 3]

Charles Spurgeon (1800’s) - “We hold--we are not afraid to say that we believe--that Christ came into this world with the intention of saving "a multitude which no man can number;" and we believe that as the result of this, every person for whom He died must, beyond the shadow of a doubt, be cleansed from sin, and stand, washed in blood, before the Father's throne. We are often told that we limit the atonement of Christ because we say that Christ has not made a satisfaction for all men or all men would be saved.  Now our reply to this is that on the other hand our opponent's limit it, we do not.  The Armenians say Christ died for all men.  Ask them what they mean by that.  Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of all men?  They say no, certainly not.  Or we ask them the next question; did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of any person in particular?  They say no.  They're obliged to say that if they're consistent.  They say no.  Christ has died that any man may be saved if...and then follows certain conditions of salvation.

We say, then, we will go back to the old statement--Christ did not die so as beyond a doubt to secure the salvation of anybody, did He? You must say "No;" you are obliged to say so, for you believe that even after a man has been pardoned, he may yet fall from grace, and perish. Now, who is it that limits the death of Christ? Why, you. You say that Christ did not die so as to infallibly secure the salvation of anybody. We beg your pardon, when you say we limit Christ's death; we say, "No, my dear sir, it is you that do it." We say Christ so died that He infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ's death 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”.
[For whom did Christ die? By C.H. Spurgeon]

"Another says, `I want to know about the rest of the people. May I go out and tell them - Jesus Christ died for every one of you? May I say - there is life for every one of you?' No; you may not. You may say - there is life for every man that comes. But if you say there is life for one of those that do not believe, you utter a dangerous lie. If you tell them Jesus Christ was punished for their sins, and yet they will be lost, you tell a willful falsehood. To think that God could punish Christ and then punish them - I wonder at your daring to have the impudence to say so!
[Free Will - A Slave, A sermon delivered Sunday morning, December 2, 1855, at New Park Street Chapel, London, England.]

"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.
[Charles H. Spurgeon, Volume 4, 1858, New Park Street Pulpit, pg. 70]

A.W. Pink (1800’s)- "But the objector comes back to John 3:16 and says, 'World means world.' True, but we have shown that 'the world' does not mean the whole human family. The fact is that 'the world' is used in a general way. When the brethren of Christ said 'Show thyself to the world' (John 7:4), did they mean show Thyself to all mankind'? When the Pharisees said 'Behold, the world is gone after Him' (John 12:19), did they mean that 'all the human family' was flocking after Him? When the apostle wrote, 'Your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world' (Rom. 1:8), did he mean that the faith of the saints at Rome was the subject of conversation by every man, woman, and child on earth? When Rev. 13:3 informs us that 'all the world wondered after the beast', are we to understand that there will be no exceptions? These, and other passages which might be quoted, show that the term 'the world' often has a relative rather than an absolute force.
[Objections to God's Sovereignty Answered by Arthur W. Pink, internet sermon]

"To sum up our comments on John 3:16. We understand 'the world' here to mean men of all nations, with an especial reference to the Gentiles, whom Nicodemus (as all Jews) considered to be accursed. To those who reject the explanation, and say, We keep by the plain declaration 'God so loved the world', we ask them to apply the same principle to the following passages: 'on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit' (Acts 10:45), 'God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life' (Acts 11:18), 'declaring the conversion of the Gentiles' (Acts 15:3). Is that expression 'the Gentiles" in these passages a general and definite one, or a universal and specific one? is it a relative or an absolute one? That is, does it take in all, or refer only to some? Acts 15:44 answers the question: 'God has visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name!"
[The Satisfaction of Christ-Studies in the Atonement, Arthur W. Pink, Truth for Today Publications, pg. 259-260]

If it were true that Christ shed His blood for those who are now in hell, what guarantee would be left me that I shall not go there?
[The Satisfaction of Christ-Studies in the Atonement, Arthur W. Pink, Truth for Today Publications, pg. 245]

John Piper (1900’s) - Therefore it becomes evident that it is not the Calvinist who limits the atonement. It is the Armenian, because he denies that the atoning death of Christ accomplishes what we most desperately need -- namely, salvation from the condition of deadness and hardness and blindness under the wrath of God. The Armenian limits the nature and value and effectiveness of the atonement so that he can say that it was accomplished even for those who die in unbelief and are condemned. In order to say that Christ died for all men in the same way, the Armenian must limit the atonement to a powerless opportunity for men to save themselves from their terrible plight of depravity.
[For Whom Did Christ Die? http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/what-we-believe-about-the-five-points-of-calvinism/#Atonement By John Piper]

John MacArthur (2000’s) - “The death of Christ was a real, true actual satisfaction of divine justice. It was a true payment and a true atonement in full, actually not potentially, paid to God by Christ on behalf of all who would ever believe because they were chosen and redeemed by the power of God. The death of Christ was definite, particular, specific and actual on behalf of God's chosen people, limited in extent by the sovereign purposes of God, but unlimited in effect, for all for whom it was rendered it is fully in force, or will be in each individual life. It is the work of God. It is the work of Christ, who accomplished redemption, not to make redemption possible to then be finally accomplished by the sinner. Christ procured salvation for all whom God would call and justify. Sinners do not limit the atonement, God does. Jesus did actually take the penalty in full for all who would ever believe”.
[The Doctrines of Actual Atonement http://www.gty.org/resources/Sermons/90-278]

So What Does World Mean?

The "whole world" refers to the children of God scattered throughout the whole world.

If "the whole world" referred to every individual in the world, we would be forced to say that John is teaching that all people will be saved, which he does not believe (Revelation 14:9-11). The reason we would be forced to say this is that the term propitiation refers to a real removal of wrath from sinners. When God's wrath against a sinner is propitiated, it is removed from that sinner. And the result is that all God's power now flows in the service of his mercy, with the result that nothing can stop him from saving that sinner.

Propitiated sins cannot be punished. Otherwise propitiation loses its meaning. Therefore if Christ is the propitiation for all the sins of every individual in the world, they cannot be punished, and must be saved. But John does not believe in such universalism (John 5:29). Therefore it is very unlikely that 1 John 2:2 teaches that Jesus is the propitiation of every person in the world.

• John 1:9- coming into the human realm Just a term for humanity or the created world. Immediately you have to qualify it.

• John 1:29 - takes away the sin of the world. Everyone would be saved. It means he came into humanity to take away sin. Verse 12 as many as received him is what qualifies it. World is just a generic term

• John 3:16 - God loved humanity!! God loved mankind. If you don’t qualify it we are going to be Universalist.

• John 4:42 - savior of the world. Can't qualify the word savior! You will limit the savior and effect of his atonement or you have to qualify the world and limit it's extent. John is addressing a thing of Jews who were convinced that it was just them for salvation not Gentiles.

• John 6:33 & 51 - gives his life for the world. Who ever eat the bread it's always qualified.

• John 12:48 save the world. He will extend it no matter race or color or sex across this planet.

• John 14:22 - Judas said not to the world. Disclose yourself to us. Wider realm of humanity the general public

• John 17- Jesus is praying for only the men God gave him not for the world. Only for the men God gave him out of the world. Jesus himself knew there were qualifications for world. It is always qualified.

• John 12:19 - world has gone after him. Qualify it.

• Acts 13:48 - When the gentiles heard this they began rejoicing and glorifying the Word of the Lord and as many as had been appointed to eternal life, believed.

• Acts 18 - the Lord came to Paul in a vision. “Do not be afraid any longer, “ the Lord said, “Go on speaking, do not be silent. I am with you and no man will attack you in order to harm you. “Listen to this, “For I have many people in this city. (They weren’t converted yet). You go there, you preach as I have many of the holy seed already there. There just waiting to hear.

• Romans 11:15 - reconciliation of the world. Church is made up of Jew and gentile.

• 2 Corinthians 5:19 - reconciling the world. Not counting their trespassing against them. It's an actual atonement. We are under no condemnation. It is the ones who no longer and new creatures in Christ v 17 v 21

• Romans 5:18 - one man all men are sinners. One act of righteousness. If you drive the parallel then you make everyone affected by Christ works and they become righteous. V19 he says many will be made righteous. Just to back us off to make sure we don't think all are saved.

• Romans 8:32 - delivered up to all. V31 for us who is against us? We are the us v29 predestined! V33 Gods elect. We are the us, all.

• 2 Corinthians 5:14 - all is qualified.

Arguments Against Limited Atonement

One of the main arguments used against limited atonement is that if Christ did not atone for the sins of everybody in the world and if God only intended to save the elect, how do you explain the numerous biblical passages that indicate the free offer of the Gospel to “whosoever will come?” How can God offer salvation to all, including those whom He has not elected or foreordained to be saved? How can we understand the paradox that occurs because the Bible teaches God intends that only the elect will be saved, yet on the other hand the Bible also unequivocally declares that God freely and sincerely offers salvation to everyone who will believe? (Ezekiel 33:11; Isaiah 45:22; 55:1; Matthew 11:28; 23:37; 2 Peter 3:9; Revelation 22:17) The solution to this paradox is simply an acknowledgment of all that the Bible teaches. 1) The call of the Gospel is universal in the sense that anybody that hears it and believes in it will be saved. 2) Because they are dead in their trespasses and sin, no one will believe the Gospel and respond in faith unless God first makes those who are dead in their trespasses and sins alive (Ephesians 2:1-5).

The Bible teaches that “whosoever believes” will have eternal life and then explains why some believe and some don’t. Another argument against limited atonement is the passages in the Bible that speak of Christ’s atonement in a more general or unlimited sense. For example in 1 John 2:2 it says that Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the “whole world.” Likewise in John 4:42 He is called the “Savior of the world” and in John 1:29 is said to “take way the sin of the world.” Other verses that seem to indicate an unlimited view of the atonement include 2 Corinthians 5:14-15: “He died for all” and 1 Timothy 2:6: “He gave Himself a ransom for all” (although Matthew 20:28 and Mark 10:45 say Christ came to “give His life a ransom for many”). Those who believe in unlimited atonement use such verses to make the point that if He died for all and takes away the sins of the world then His atonement cannot be limited to only the elect. However, these verses are easily reconciled with the many other verses that support the doctrine of limited atonement simply by recognizing that often the Bible uses the words “world” or “all” in a limited sense. They do not automatically mean “every individual in the entire world.”

This is evident when just a few verses are considered. In Luke 2:1 it is recorded that a “decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered” and Luke 2:3 says, “So all went to be registered everyone to his own city.” But clearly that it is not talking about every individual in the whole world. Caesar’s decree did not apply to the Japanese, Chinese or countless other people throughout the world. Similarly, the Pharisees, being dismayed at Jesus’ growing popularity said, “Look how the whole world has gone after Him!” Did every single person in the world follow Jesus? Or was the “world” limited to a small area of Palestine in which Jesus preached? So it should be readily apparent that the phrase “all” or “all the world” does not necessarily mean every individual. Understanding that basic fact allows one to consider each of these seemingly universal passages in their context and when that is done it becomes very apparent that they do not present any conflict with the doctrine of limited atonement.

Yet another argument against limited atonement is that it is a hindrance to the preaching of the Gospel and to evangelism. Those that use this argument will say that if an evangelist cannot say “Christ died for you,” then his effectiveness in presenting the Gospel will be limited. Or they will say that if only the elect will be saved, why should the Gospel be preached at all? Once again, these objections are easily dealt with. The Gospel is to be preached to everyone, because it is the power of God to salvation for all who believe (Romans 1:16) and it is the means that God has ordained by which the elect will be saved (Romans 10:14-17). Also, the evangelist does not need to tell the unbeliever that “Christ died for your sins” specifically. All he needs to proclaim is that Christ died to pay the penalty for sin and provided a way for sinners to be reconciled to a holy God. Believe in Him and you will be saved.

Hebrews 10:29 - "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who will trample underfoot the Son of God and regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which He was sanctified.” It’s not talking about sinners being sanctified it’s talking about Christ!

2 Peter 2:1 - "Wait a minute, it says of those people they’re who were apostate that they denied the Master who bought them." Sure, there's sarcasm there, they claimed to be true believers. They claimed to be true teachers. They infiltrated the church as false teachers and Peter says, "You now have denied the Master who bought you." We know the Master didn't pay the price for damnable heretics.

Conclusion

So how do we summarize this? The death of Christ was a real, true actual satisfaction of divine justice. It was a true payment and a true atonement in full, actually not potentially, paid to God by Christ on behalf of all who would ever believe because they were chosen and redeemed by the power of God. The death of Christ was definite, particular, specific and actual on behalf of God's chosen people, limited in extent by the sovereign purposes of God, but unlimited in effect, for all for whom it was rendered it is fully in force, or will be in each individual life. It is the work of God. It is the work of Christ who accomplished redemption, not to make redemption possible to then be finally accomplished by the sinner. Christ procured salvation for all whom God would call and justify. Sinners do not limit the atonement, God does. Jesus did actually take the penalty in full for all who would ever believe.

References

Berg, M. L. V. (2016). Atonement. In Faithlife study Bible. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

Berkhof, L. (1938). Systematic theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co.

Bird, M. F. (2013). Evangelical theology: A Biblical and systematic introduction. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Bauckham, R. (1992). Descent to the Underworld. In D. N. Freedman (Ed.), The anchor yale Bible dictionary. New York: Doubleday.

Calvin, J. (2011). Institutes of the Christian religion & 2. (J. T. McNeill, Ed., F. L. Battles, Trans.) (Vol. 1). Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.

Deane, S. N. with Saint Anselm. (1939). Proslogium; Monologium; An appendix, In behalf of the fool, by Gaunilon; and Cur Deus homo. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company.

Erickson, M. (2013). Christian theology (3rd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group. 

Garland, E. D. (2003). 1 Corinthians. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group.

Grudem, W. A. (2004). Systematic theology: An introduction to Biblical doctrine. Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan Pub. House.

Hiehle, J. A. (2016). Descent into the Underworld. In J. D. Barry, D. Bomar, D. R. Brown, R. Klippenstein, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair Wolcott, … W. Widder (Eds.), The lexham Bible dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

Henderson, J. J. (2016). Substitution. In J. D. Barry, D. Bomar, D. R. Brown, R. Klippenstein, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair Wolcott, … W. Widder (Eds.), The lexham Bible dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

Lecture 1. (2016). HTH-202: Christian Theology II. Phoenix, AZ: Grand Canyon University.

Merriam-Webster, I. (2003). Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary.(Eleventh ed.). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc.

Trotter, A. H., Jr. (1996). Atonement. In Evangelical dictionary of Biblical theology(electronic ed., pp. 42–45). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.

Yarbrough, R. W. (2000). Atonement. In T. D. Alexander & B. S. Rosner (Eds.), New dictionary of Biblical theology(electronic ed.). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.