Defending Calvinism (L= Limited Atonement)

Previously, when defending Calvinism, I discussed Unconditional Election. Now I will argue for the next point of Calvinism, Limited Atonement. Some refer to this school of thought as Definite Atonement since the atonement was for a definite audience. The atonement is the work Christ did for us in his death to earn salvation for those who would believe, the elect. Christ died a penal substitutionary death, meaning that in his death on the cross, he paid the penalty for his people, even though he lived a sinless life. In short, his death assured that the debt had been paid for his people.

Before we dive into the controversial aspects of the atonement, lets first look at why the atonement was necessary. Could there be any other way that God could save humans without Christ dying on the cross? As I previously touched on, God would have been perfectly just to not save anyone, as all have violated his law, and sinned against a holy God. God is under no obligation to save anyone. But God decided to save some human beings. However, God is just, so there was a price that had to be paid, just as in a court room if someone is guilty, the offending party must pay a price. In this case, however, Christ paid the penalty.

Before we go any further, ask yourself these questions: Did Christ die to make salvation possible for everybody, but with the possibility that it would not be effective for anybody? Did God, from all eternity, have a specific plan and design the atonement to secure the salvation for a certain people? Was the atonement limited in its intent? Was Jesus' death a potential atonement, or an actual atonement?

The question has been, who did Christ die for? There are basically three options: Christ died for everyone, Christ died for no one, or Christ died for some people. If Christ died for everyone, we would end up in universalism, which is to say that Christ died for every single person who ever lived, regardless if they believed or not. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest this thought. They may argue that Christ died for every single person, with the hope that they would possibly come to Christ. This is probably the most common belief and teaching in modern American evangelical churches. They would say that the atonement is limited to those who believe, and salvation was only made possible by Christ. This belief says that the death of Christ only ensured the possibility that sinners may come to God, but did not guarantee the salvation of anyone. There are many holes in this argument, most notably, in theory this would leave open the possibility that no one would come to Christ and his death was for nothing. It also results in synergism, where our participation is required for salvation. They are saying that God can not complete the work of salvation on his own. Many modern evangelicals that agree with this, may be surprised to realize this belief is closer to Roman Catholicism than historical Protestantism.

I will argue that the Biblical position is that Christ died for all the sins of certain people, and his death secured the salvation of those people. The term "monergism" is derived from a Greek word that means "to work alone". Monergists would be in disagreement with synergists and say that God alone works out our salvation, and all glory goes to God. We contribute nothing to our salvation. Salvation was completed at the cross, and the atonement was sufficient to cover all the sins of certain people.

Jesus' death was a covenantal death and brought in the New Covenant. His death had a specific audience with a specific effect. "Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them form the transgressions committed under the first covenant." As you can see, there is a specific purpose ("those who have been called") and those who have been "called" were the intention of the atonement. Jesus as the high priest intercedes on our behalf to the Father.

In John 6:37-39, Jesus teaches that those who are gathered to come to him, are those that the Father has determined who will come to him: "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, no to do my own will but the will of him who has sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given to me, but raise it up on the last day." The Father does not want the Son's work on the cross to be in vain, so he guarantees that some people will come to Christ, and these are those that the atonement is for. It is the gift of the Father to the Son that we are given to him. Jesus uses the phrase "gives me" to indicate that believers are gifts to him from God. God's sovereignty gave Jesus confidence that the mission would not fail. The word, "all" does not leave any room for error of possibilities that Jesus doesn't know who will respond. "All" is a strong statement.

At the Feast of Dedication, the Jews wanted Jesus to tell them explicitly that he was the Messiah, almost as if he was put on trial. "...but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand." There may not be a stronger statement in all of Scripture about the intended audience of the atonement than right here.  Jesus' response here is that they do not believe, and clearly won't believe because they are not part of his flock.  They did not believe the miracles that Jesus had performed because they were not of his sheep, and the ability to believe had not been granted to them by the Father. So, if the sheep hear his voice, and Christ knows the sheep, what does that mean for those who don't hear his voice? It is logical to say that those who don't hear Christ's voice are not his sheep and Christ doesn't know them in the salvific sense. They do not believe because they are not part of the flock.

In John 10:11, Jesus said: "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep." We can see here Jesus' substitutionary death on the cross is for sinners, but what sinners? Jesus points to the sheep. Jesus is the good shepherd who lays down his life for a specific people, the sheep.

Even when Mary was pregnant with Jesus, the angel spoke of a limited atonement, "She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins." (Matthew 1:21) There is significance in the angel using the phrase, "his people." It is clear that the angel isn't saying that Christ will save every person or every Jew. The angel speaks of a certain people, and they clearly belong to God. Pay close attention to note that it does not say that Christ will make salvation possible for everyone. "...he will save his people from their sins."

We read in Acts 13:48, "And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed." Who believed? As many as were appointed to eternal life.

Jesus said in John 5:21, "For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son give life to whom he will." Not only is Jesus making a claim to his deity by saying he can do what only God can do, but he makes a distinction about who he will give life to.

Jesus makes another distinction in John 17: 9-10: "I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours. All mine are yours, and yours are mine, and I am glorified in them." Jesus is saying that he is praying only for those who the Father has given to them. These are those who have believed or would come to believe in Christ. And if this refers to those who would later come to believe in Christ, they are already his before conversion.

A common objection to the doctrine of limited/definite atonement is that this teaching does damage to evangelism. I've heard the argument that if we believe only certain individuals will be saved, that Christ died only for certain people, this will hurt our missions effort throughout the world. After all, they say, if we are to believe this idea that only certain people will be saved, and if they will be saved no matter if we evangelize them, then we won't feel the urgency to bring the Gospel to the world. However, you won't find one person that agrees with limited/definite atonement that is consistent with their beliefs who would believe this. We have no idea who the elect are, and the elect do not possess certain external features that would tell us who they are. In fact, the belief of limited/definite atonement should give you more desire and excitement to preach the Gospel. If there are no guarantees that there are any that will be saved, you could spend your whole life preaching and never reach one conversion. However, Scripture guarantees that there will be some groups you encounter that will come to Christ. Evangelism is the means by which God brings his people to himself.

Perhaps the most commonly referenced verse when objecting to limited/definite atonement is from Revelation 3:20: "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me." When looking at this verse isolated from the other verses around it, you could come to the conclusion that Jesus is asking everyone to let him in. However, context, as always, is key. Jesus is not speaking to individual believers, but to the Church in Laodicea. The Church in Laodicea was "neither cold or hot". This church used his name, but had no believers. If one member of this church would respond and repent, Jesus would enter the church. Revelation 3:14-22 is also a great reminder for churches today.

If Jesus died to make it possible for everyone to be saved, but actually didn't save anyone, then it is entirely possible that his death would be in vain because of the possibility that every person in the world might reject Christ. What if every last person chose to remain dead in their trespasses and sins? Under this belief, it is possible that God's plan could be thwarted, and his sovereignty challenged because no one possibly would take advantage of it. This idea would depend on each person deciding if they wanted to be saved. In many ways, the question comes down to this: do you believe in the sovereignty of man or God?

Scripture is clear that God decided prior to the foundation of the world that he would save a certain amount of people, those referred to as the elect. To make this plan a reality, God the Father, sent the Son to die on the cross for the elect, and not a single drop of blood was shed in vain. There is no glory to man in this belief, as all glory goes to God.

Soli deo Gloria!