Limited Atonement

Has the Gospel been presented to all? I don’t think so,
Have many died without hearing it? Yes.
Does every moral agent know and violate the law of God? yes.
We then see a difference between the law and the gospel. The law is universal and the gospel is not.
The law has a purpose: to expose sin and justify condemnation for sinners. The gospel has a purpose: To proclaim Jesus as both Lord and Savior and to be used by the Spirit to being faith and salvation to whomsoever He wills.

Since God has seen fit to bring a condemning law that is universal but a saving word that is limited, it is folly to think that God wants everyone saved. He wants no one to sin. But all do. That is their action, their choice. They react to truth with the lie; to righteousness with sin. They [everyone[ are justly condemned.
But God does not bring a saving word to everyone. That is His action, His choice. Now since that is His choice, whose sins did Jesus die for? Did He die for the sins of the people who God never chooses to present a saving word? What would be the point? At best one could say that Jesus died for the sins of only those who would hear the gospel. That would be a limited atonement.

Now if one believes in a substitionary atonement, how is it Jesus died for the sins of those who never believe?
There is a condition: we are justified by faith. No faith = no justification.
If you hear the gospel and never believe it, did Jesus die in your place?
Did He take on the wrath of God for you?
Was the punishment due you meted out to Him?
Was the death of Jesus personal in respect to you?
Or was it an impersonal death and all of our sins were just thrown together in some big bowl of God’s wrath poured out on Jesus?
Jesus died in my place, experiencing the wrath of God I deserve, and because of the personal nature of the atonement, His death for me, necessarily had to bring life to me.
Mike
Advertisements

About parsonsmike

seriously into the Word of God
This entry was posted in Calvinism/Traditionalism, Indigenous Posts, theology, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Limited Atonement

  1. chaddamitz says:

    One of the strongest arguments I have heard for limited atonement. Thanks for the insight.

  2. Limited Atonement like Predestination, Total Depravity/Inability, Unconditional Election, Irresistible Grace, Perseverance/Preservation of the Saints, and Reprobation is an invitation to begin one’s spiritual pilgrimage or in our language, “It is an invitation to salvation.” We should expect to win the whole world and every soul in it with these truths that bring conviction and conversion. Dr. John Eusden in his Introduction to his translation of William Ames, Marrow of Divinity (the first textbook in theology used at Harvard University), declared that “Predestination is an invitation to begin one’s spiritual pilgrimage,….” Silas Mercer, the father of Jesse after whom Mercer University is named, declared in a circular letter for the Georgia Baptist Association written in 1787 that Predestination is “a doctrine which God generally owns and blesses to the conviction and conversion of sinners, and comforting of his saints. For blessed be the Lord, we can say, that we know by a blessed experience, that it hath had this effect amongst us….”

Comments are closed.