NOTE: If you are reading this series, it would be most helpful to read them in order, beginning with Part 1.
Of the five “points” of Calvinism, I thought I’d tackle the one most have the hardest time with – the L in TULIP for Limited Atonement. Most who consider themselves “four pointer” Calvinists do so due to struggles with this one and understandably so. To use the term ‘limited’ when we are talking about Jesus Christ is an immediate turn-off. I agree.
Now in this series, there are of course people far more studied than I, who write with far greater depth on these topics than I. I write of my personal experiences with these doctrines, more of a “How I got here” flavor.
First I’ll define my terms and start with atonement. Easton’s Bible Dictionary states:
“The meaning of the word is simply at-one-ment, i.e., the state of being at one or being reconciled, so that atonement is reconciliation. Thus it is used to denote the effect which flows from the death of Christ.
But the word is also used to denote that by which this reconciliation is brought about, viz., the death of Christ itself; and when so used it means satisfaction, and in this sense to make an atonement for one is to make satisfaction for his offences, and, as regards the person, to reconcile, to propitiate God in his behalf.”
So when we speak of atonement, we mean those actually “at one” with God, reconciled to him, for which the death of Christ was satisfaction for their sins so that reconciliation is accomplished. I hope that helps to begin to point to the problem of an ‘unlimited’ atonement.
However, when speaking of our Savior and his cross, the word “limited” just doesn’t sit right. For these reasons, many state that “limited atonement” is not the best way to describe what this is really about and prefer “particular atonement” or “definite atonement”. That messes up the TULIP acrostic, but I would agree these other terms are more descriptive of the true concept.
I think the thing that helped me the most as I struggled with this one was somewhere I read that every orthodox Christian must limit the atonement – thus everyone believes in limited atonement, it is only a question of in what way you limit it. A truly unlimited atonement equates to Universalism, the unorthodox doctrine that hell will be empty and every human being will be saved. That would mean that Christ, who is the one who spoke the most about hell, the broad road to destruction with many on it, etc. was mistaken or a liar.
If you are an orthodox Christian, you will limit the atonement of Christ in typically one of two ways: you either limit its extent (who it was for) or you limit its efficacy (what it accomplished). Arminianism limits efficacy but not the extent, Calvinism limits the extent but not the efficacy. Let me explain what I mean.
To be fair, I’ll let the Articles of Remonstration define “unlimited atonement” as used by most Arminians as presented in Article 2: “This article rejects the concept of limited atonement, which asserts that Christ only died for those God chooses to be saved. This article asserts that Christ died for all, but that salvation is limited to those who believe in Christ.”
While that sounds really good on the surface, it begs a very serious question: if Christ died for all, but salvation is limited to those who believe, then what did Christ’s death actually accomplish if it was for all? When he cried “It is finished!” on that cross as he died, WHAT was finished? That is a very probing question. Not to be flippant with such a serious matter, but was he saying his sacrifice was finished; and now he’s going to heaven after making the offer possible, hoping some will hear and believe in him? Or was he saying that for his sheep, his people, his elect – their salvation is actually accomplished and the efficacy of his death and resurrection is not limited for them? That is something every believer has to answer, and it has huge implications to God’s glory. Did Jesus Christ just make an offer possible, or did He actually accomplish salvation on the cross? Did he actually reconcile a people, the elect, to God? This really is about what happened on the cross and what it accomplished. No light matter.
I came to understand that if I don’t limit the extent of Christ’s atonement on the cross, to have an ‘unlimited atonement’ in that sense, then what the atonement accomplished was to make salvation possible, but not actually DO IT. If the extent is not limited to the elect, then it was not fully effective – it did not accomplish actual salvation for the reconciled – or you would be a universalist. On the other hand, if you believe that the cross actually accomplished salvation, that is was fully effective, that he fully paid for my sins so, in the fullness of time, the Holy Spirit could create that new heart in me and give me the gifts of repentance and faith BECAUSE my debt was paid on that cross on that day – then you must limit the extent – it was only for those who do, in time, repent and believe and are actually saved.
Also wrapped into this is the concept of the justice of God. If Christ died for all men, if his death paid the debt for the sins of all men and reconciled (at-one) all men to God, if he removed God’s wrath from all men – then hell must be empty or God is unjust to punish any for sin when the penalty has already been paid by His Son. I’m not sure anyone would state that is what they believe, but it is the logical conclusion of some of these positions on the atonement if you do not limit who it was for.
I also came to realize that by limiting the extent, I am not limiting the value of Christ’s sacrifice. As the Son of God, God incarnate – the value of his sacrifice is more than the value of all of his creation combined. This is not an argument to limit the value of the one on that cross – his value is infinite. Getting that straight helped me as well. This is not an argument over the value of the sacrifice, merely the extent for whom is was effectual. Big difference.
OK, to the Scriptures. I’ll list some here that speak to the efficacy of Christ’s work on the cross.
Every Christmas we probably say or hear this verse so many times, and we are so familiar with it, we may not actually meditate on what it says. Think about what the angel, God’s direct messenger, said to Joseph in light of this topic:
She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.
Matthew 1:21 ESV
Isaiah speaks of the coming Messiah who MAKES many to be accounted righteous, bearing their sins.
Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied;
Isaiah 53:11 ESV
by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant,
make many to be accounted righteous,
and he shall bear their iniquities.
Jesus said his purpose was to give his life as a ransom, an actual payment, for the many.
even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
Matthew 20:28 ESV
Who exactly did Jesus lay down his life for? He tells us:
I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
John 10:11 ESV
For on that cross, as Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied. Accomplished for his people. Jesus saves. He was not sent to make an offer possible, he was sent to save his people from their sins.
If you think Jesus came to earth and died on the cross merely to make salvation a possibility, that a person in their free will would have an opportunity to ‘choose him’ – I’d suggest, as I had to do, spending some time in John 17 and Ephesians 1:1-14 and don’t leave until you see the plan the triune God is working out in history. The Father gives a people, a bride, to His Son as a gift, His Son redeems them through his substitutionary death and resurrection, the Spirit then applying that in your life in time. This is the plan of the triune Godhead from before the foundation of the world to display the glory of his grace as he says in the Ephesians passage. These and other scriptures elevated my view of God as I saw He isn’t hoping some turn to him, he’s steering, he’s accomplishing in time this eternal plan to save the bride of Christ, those who will attend the marriage supper of the Lamb.
Also please don’t confuse this discussion on the extent/efficacy of the atonement with evangelism. Understand that we humans do not know who the elect are, the ones for whom Christ died and actually paid their sin debt. Our task, per his command, is therefore to preach the gospel to every creature. The absolutely sovereign one who ordained the end also ordained the means, and that is he does this through the proclamation of His Word. He has ordained that through “the foolishness of preaching” that He will save His sheep. Our job – present the gospel of Jesus Christ to all. God’s job – use that to save His sheep.
Soli Deo Gloria.