There
have been centuries of debate regarding these two schools of thought, and there
will be debates for years to come. I want to analyze both again and provide arguments
for each one.
I
want to start with the unlimited atonement view. Unlimited Atonement teaches us
that when Christ died on the cross, he died for everyone that will ever live.
In other words, Jesus died for the sins of the entire world, for all time. What
this has to mean is Jesus paid the sin debt for everyone – even those who die
in sin and are lost forever. In the unlimited atonement view, Jesus died for
those who he knew beforehand would never believe in him. So, in this
sense, Jesus died to make men only savable, but did not guarantee their salvation.
The unlimited atonement view lays out God’s plan of salvation, sinful man
surveys it through the preaching of the gospel and decides (on his own) to
accept or reject the offer. Man decides if salvation succeeds or fails in the
unlimited atonement view.
Why?
Because
God is not choosing man first, man is choosing God first. If man has the power and
moral resolve to incline him/herself to faith in God – man is choosing God, then
it “frees” God to react to man’s faith to choose and save him. What has happened
is the faith of man has dictated the choosing or election of him. In the
unlimited view, God chooses man after man chooses him. God is at the “mercy” of
man’s choosing or rejection of him. Limited atonement teaches that God has
chosen those who he wants to be recipients of his saving grace. The Bible refers
to these people as the elect of God. Jesus refers to them as his sheep (John
10:27-30). Those that are chosen are predetermined by God before creation
(Ephesians 1:4). In other words, there is nothing that man does good or bad
that determines God’s choice of who he wants to save. God’s choosing is
un-influenced. It is what scholars call a monergistic work.
A deeper analysis
of each
Some including the
writer see unlimited atonement as a man centered doctrine. Why? Because man is the initiator of the process.
If Jesus washed away everyone’s sins, then everyone goes to heaven. There would be no
hell. We know that is not true. What the majority report (i.e., unlimited atonement)
is telling us is that we have countless souls suffering in hell right now for
whom Christ died. Christ dies for the sins of those who go to hell, and the condemned
also pays for the same sins in a Christless eternity – a double payment for
sins. The Bible never teaches a dual punishment for sins. Either Christ pays
your sin debt if you’re saved, or the unredeemed pays their own sin debt for
eternity. What this means if one dies
in unbelief, Christ did not pay your sin debt. His provision is available, but
one has to repent and believe for the atonement to benefit you.
Question, did the
Father send the Son to suffer and die for those he knew would never believe in
him?
There are others including myself that see limited atonement as a
God/Christ centered doctrine. Limited atonement teaches God decided to choose
before time began those who he decided would be saved. God choosing before hand
is also called predestination and divine election which by the way is the
minority report. It is the minority report because in the minds of many predestination
seems unfair. Why would one have the audacity to teach that God chooses some
and passes by others? Why would God save some and condemn others? Here is my reply. Number one God is never
obligated to show mercy and grace to an evil humanity. If he were, it’s no
longer mercy and grace, it’s a debt God owes to man. We all deserve eternal
damnation. God has every right exercise his justice and destroy us all right
now. But, because he is so rich in mercy, and he loves us so much, he devised a
plan before creation to rescue mankind. He sends Jesus Christ to come and die
the death we deserved. For those who repent and believe they will be saved, for
those who reject Christ’s love, they will be condemned (John 3:17-19).
Now,
limited atonement teaches the atonement is limited to whom it extends, the elect,
but it is unlimited in its power to save the elect – redeeming them. The
difference in unlimited atonement is that it teaches that it is unlimited in its
reach but is limited in its power to save anyone. Why? Because it leaves the
decision to sinful man alone to decide to repent and believe in
Christ which the sinner will never do. Why? Man is dead (spiritually) in his
trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1; Colossians 2:13). Like I said earlier in
unlimited atonement, man must choose God in order for God to react and choose
him for salvation. In the limited view, God chooses man in eternity past, and
at the precise moment in time the chosen hears the gospel, God will regenerate
(make them alive or born-again John 3:3) they will repent and believe and be
saved. All those whom God chooses will be saved -guaranteed (Matthew 1:21).
Here is the sum of the matter. Everyone who is
a real Christian believes in a limited and an unlimited atonement. The question
is in what manner do you believe these doctrines? If you say Christ died and washed
away the sins of all people for all time, then you have to believe that all
will be saved, and hell does not exist. That would be the doctrine of Universalism, everyone goes to heaven.
If one leans
toward limited atonement, then you will be labeled a Calvinist because your
view is considered narrow regarding who Jesus came to die for – the elect or
chosen of God alone. This view is considered not fair because it supposedly
leaves the non-elect out in the cold. The question is often asked, why won’t
God save all? The reason this question is asked because many believe what God
does for one, he has to do for everyone. The better question we should ask is,
why God saves anyone since none deserve it?
So, in the final
analysis the Lord is displaying tremendous grace by deciding to save throughout
history an enumerable number of souls. God is not preventing anyone from coming
to him. All one has to do is repent of their sins and believe.