Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Limited Atonement Remix Part 6

V. In What Way Did Christ Die for Everyone? (Part 2)

One of the problems that I see in people in both camps of this debate is a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between God choosing to save all men to salvation and having an “attitude” of loving-kindness toward humanity as a whole. John 3:16 is one of many examples where it is best to see God’s love for the world as one for the whole of humanity because of the remnant which He has chosen to save for His glory. I have said before that the emphasis of John 3:16 is not to say that God really loves every single person in the world. But instead the emphasis is on the great love of God; which is demonstrated in that He gave His infinitely valuable Son to an infinitely undeserving group. God’s Son and “the world” are as much contrast as light and dark in John’s theology.

Another example is 2 Corinthians 5:19 where God is said to have “reconciled the world to himself…” the context, though it sounds more Arminian than the majority of the Bible, doesn’t contradict what we have already discussed in regard to Christ’s death. God has reconciled the world to Himself but He has also “entrusted us with the message of reconciliation.” What is that message? “…be reconciled to God” (2 Corinthians 5:20). So again we see that the text can’t be saying that everyone in the world is reconciled to God and we know from the rest of the Bible that not everyone will be reconciled to God.

In what way then has He done this? He has reconciled the world to Himself in that He has a people in the world (and from every part of the world) who will be reconciled through the truth of the message of reconciliation. Not only so but He also has these people in the world proclaiming to the world the truth that if they would repent and come to Christ with the empty hand of faith they would be reconciled as well.

The very fact that the verb “reconciled” is in the active voice when speaking of God and the passive voice when speaking to us should make it clear to us that Paul is not trying to say that every person has been reconciled already. If God has reconciled every single person to Himself you don’t then proclaim to a person “be reconciled!” because it would have already been done.

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

2 comments:

Unknown said...

Stephen, let me ask you this: If Calvinist believe in limited atonement, that God elects those He brings to redemption, then why do Calvinists believe in infant baptism? Is that not man choosing whom are elected? Also, how do Calvinists justify Romans 5:18? How can Calvinists claim that sin entered all men and condemned them all, yet that salvation is somehow not available to all?

Stephen B. said...

Chelsea,

I appreciate you reading and commenting. I’m guessing you read the whole series, but if not please check it out and feel free to comment as you see fit. I know that sometimes internet “debate” of any kind can have a harsh tone, and I’m not a big fan of that. So let me begin by saying that I am encouraged by your questions. I appreciate that your question isn’t from a mere “face value” reading of the text but you are truly seeking to get your theology from Paul’s argument.

1) I’m a Baptist so I don’t really have much of an answer for your first question. I have looked into to the infant baptism issue and I just don’t see it as biblical. I think it’s inconsistent as you pointed out.

2) As for your question on Romans 5, that is something I wrestled over as I studied the topic initially. It’s quite difficult to understand what Paul is trying to say, and how that can be applied to our understanding of the atonement. Verse 18 uses the word “all” both for those who are condemned and for those who are justified. Then in verse 19 we find the word “many” used for both groups. Taking in the context I don’t think the point of Paul’s argument is to say that Christ died for as many people as were affected by sin. In fact, I think that understanding takes away from what Paul is really saying. Instead, I think he is saying that what Christ has done for all who are in him is far greater (i.e. more powerful) than what Adam has done for all who are in him. If you look at Paul’s argument it is clearly pitting Adam (the type) up against Christ (the typified) to show the greatness of Christ.

Hope this helps, let me know what you think.

Grace and Peace,
Stephen