Limited Atonement

[Marcia]

Limited Atonement is a doctrine offered in answer to the question, "for whose sins did Christ atone?" The Bible teaches that Christ died for those whom God gave him to save (John 17:9). Christ died, indeed, for many people, but not all (Matthew 26:28). Specifically, Christ died for the invisible Church -- the sum total of all those who would ever rightly bear the name "Christian" (Ephesians 5:25).

I was just wondering , if christ died for all , why does the scripture in Matthew 26:28 say "Many" instead of "All" .................?

Matthew 26:28This is my blood of the[a] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

Re John 9 -- never go by a single verse! Read the whole passage. Jesus is specifically talking about the apostles!

6"I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word.
7"Now they have come to know that everything You have given Me is from You;
8for the words which You gave Me I have given to them; and they received them and truly understood that I came forth from You, and they believed that You sent Me.
9"I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours;

 

[Jim1999]

Christ died for all, but instead of some.......His blood was sufficient for all, but effecient for the elect. In this sense we speak of a limited atonement.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Marcia]

.......His blood was sufficient for all, but effecient for the elect. In this sense we speak of a limited atonement.

Cheers,

Jim

Is this the same as saying that His blood was sufficient for all but applied only to those who believe?

 

[RAdam]

The sufficient for all, efficient for the elect just doesn't work. It's like having your cake and eating it too. It's something that Andrew Fuller came up and the Baptists never believed in that doctrine before he came up with it.

The question has been asked, for whom did Christ die. Thankfully, the scriptures answer. Isaiah 53 says these kinds of things: "for the transgression of my people was he stricked," and "by his knowledge shall by righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities." How about Hebrews 2? "For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren," and "forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage." There he talks about the sons brought to glory, and goes on to say these are they who are sanctified. Carry that to Hebrews 10: "for by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified."

 

[RAdam]

Re John 9 -- never go by a single verse! Read the whole passage. Jesus is specifically talking about the apostles!

Verses 6-19 are about the apostles, the rest of that chapter is not.

 

[RAdam]

:laughon't worry. No one else understands him either.


Question to you, did God limit the atonement for Israel?

If you are asking are there Jews for whom Christ did not die, then the answer is yes, that is true. Jesus Himself told certain Jews they would die in their sins, they weren't of His sheep, they were of their father the devil, they weren't of God, they were serpents and a generation of vipers and asked "how can ye escape the damnation of hell?"

 

[Amy.G]

If you are asking are there Jews for whom Christ did not die, then the answer is yes, that is true. Jesus Himself told certain Jews they would die in their sins, they weren't of His sheep, they were of their father the devil, they weren't of God, they were serpents and a generation of vipers and asked "how can ye escape the damnation of hell?"

No. I asked "did God limit the atonement of Israel?"

Was the once a year sacrifice for Israel sufficient for all of Israel or only a few?

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Who is it that God has given to Christ? Interestingly, the section of scripture you used to try to disprove particular redemption says exactly who God gave Christ.

First of all, the text that you referred to is speaking of that moment when Jesus was made a little lower than the angels. The text goes on to explain that this was for, or by, the suffering of death to the end that He should taste death for every man. Now many latch on to that last part but fail to keep reading. The next few texts read like this: "For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee. And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me. Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted."

Now that was a lot of scripture, but it was important to look at the whole passage, because it is all interconnected. You see the word "for" a lot, meaning that the scripture is explaining itself further, connecting itself together. This section of scripture is really explaining why Jesus took on Himself human nature and suffered on the cross. It was to "taste death for every man." But, then the scripture goes on to explain that He was bringing many sons unto glory, that He is the captain of their (the sons brought unto glory) salvation, and that He was made perfect through suffering (that suffering being that of the cross). Now, the scripture goes on to say that He is not ashamed to call these sons brethren, and even identifies them as the children which God gave Him. Who did God give Christ? He gave Him children, the sons brought unto glory, the every man Christ tasted death for. You see how these texts are talking about what Christ did on the cross and why He did it. He took on Himself the nature of His brethren, that He might destroy death for them and deliver them from the bondage they were held under. It was their sins He made reconciliation for. When Christ tasted death for every man He did so for the cause that they wouldn't, to the end that they would be brought unto glory and freed from death and him that had the power of death. This is why He was made flesh and suffered. The every man He suffered for are the children given Him, to whom He gives eternal life, of whom He will not lose one but raise them up again. He didn't taste death for Judas Iscariot who was and is a devil, who betrayed Him, who it would have been better for him had he not been born. He died for God's people, the ones given Him, to the end that not one would be lost.

I think the problem is you confuse the extent of the objective work of the atonement with the extent of the subjective appropriation of the same. The passage says Christ tasted death for everyone (or "every man")--it doesn't say "He tasted death for every member of the elect". Only by conflating the extent of the objective work with the extent of the subjective appropriation does one read into the text the equation "every man"="only everyone of the elect".

The "bringing of many sons to glory" refers to those who actually become partakers of Christ's atoning work through faith--those who are actually being sanctified.

Now, I will agree that those that God "gave" Christ are "children"(the elect), but that in and of itself doesn't prove that: (1) these children were elected unconditionally; nor that (2) Christ died only for the elect and no one else.

At any rate, you'd be hard pressed to prove that the writer of Hebrews was a Calvinist. :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Marcia]

Verses 6-19 are about the apostles, the rest of that chapter is not.

I never said the whole chapter. I said "read the whole passage."

Here is what I wrote:

Re John 9 -- never go by a single verse! Read the whole passage.

I made a mistake - it should have said "Re John 17:9." I was in a hurry and didn't notice. I was referring to verse 9, which is the verse cited in the post I was responding to.

 

[RAdam]

Hebrews is explaining this: "thou madest him a little lower than the angels." Why did that happen? Why was Christ, the creator of the angels, for a time made a little lower than them? Hebrews explains that He was made thus for, or by, the suffering of death, that He, by the grace of God, should taste death for every man. The very next word is "for", or because, further explaining what the scriptures had just said. It says it became the Father, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. Ah, we are still talking about the suffering of death, when Christ tasted death for every man. You can see the connection here. It's the same subject under consideration. Not the application of the atonement, but the act and the extent of it.

Now, you say we can't know anything of the children given Him. That's not true. Hebrews 2 says that these people are His brethren, the children given Him by the Father. Ephesians 1 says, "according as he hath chosen us in him (Christ) before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love, having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ unto himself according to the good pleasure of his will..." A similar passage from Romans 8: "for whom he did foreknow he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his son that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." We can see that the same group of folks are under consideration here. These are the many(not few mind you) sons brought unto glory, the children which God had given Him, the people He is not ashamed to call brethren and they were chosen in Him before the world began and predestinated to the end that He (Christ) would be the firstborn among many many brethren. That's just a few texts that show that these children were the subject of unconditional election and that's who Christ died for.

By the way, the word every, in the old english it had the imagery of picturing the whole through the individual. In other words, Hebrews is saying He tasted death for every man under consideration from an individual standpoint. In other words, He didn't taste death for some nameless group of people, but rather for individuals. He tasted death, I trust, for you and I. Have you ever wondered why? Why did Christ taste death for me? Was it so that I would not have to taste it myself? If so, then why did He taste it for Judas Iscariot (under the idea you have set forth)?

 

[RAdam]

No. I asked "did God limit the atonement of Israel?"

Was the once a year sacrifice for Israel sufficient for all of Israel or only a few?

That sacrifice was a picture of the sacrifice of Christ. The blood of those goats did nothing for sins, so it wasn't sufficient for anyone. It pictured something. Israel, for whom the sacrifice was made, also pictured something. What did they picture? The elect. God's chosen people.

 

[Amy.G]

That sacrifice was a picture of the sacrifice of Christ. The blood of those goats did nothing for sins, so it wasn't sufficient for anyone. It pictured something. Israel, for whom the sacrifice was made, also pictured something. What did they picture? The elect. God's chosen people.

You still have not answered the question. Was atonement made for ALL Israel? Will every single Jew be in heaven? Was atonement made for Judas?

 

[RAdam]

What do you mean? Did Jesus atone for every single Jew? No. There were some He said were going to die in their sins, were of their father the devil, were not of His sheep.

If you are asking about the day of atonement, no sins were atoned there except in a figure, in which case Israel is also a picture of something.

 

[Amy.G]

What do you mean? Did Jesus atone for every single Jew? No. There were some He said were going to die in their sins, were of their father the devil, were not of His sheep.

Num 15:25 And the priest shall make an atonement for all the congregation of the children of Israel,

Lev 16:17 And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy [place], until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel.


God's word says atonement was made for ALL Israel.

And yes, this is a shadow of the once for all atonement made by Christ, which is why Calvinists cannot say that Christ died for some and not all.

 

[webdog]

What do you mean? Did Jesus atone for every single Jew? No. There were some He said were going to die in their sins, were of their father the devil, were not of His sheep.

If you are asking about the day of atonement, no sins were atoned there except in a figure, in which case Israel is also a picture of something.

...yet just a couple posts up you state "That sacrifice was a picture of the sacrifice of Christ." Now, if the OT sacrifice was a picture of Christ's sacrifice, and it was done on behalf of the entire nation (not just the faithful, righteous within Israel, remember, "not all Israel is Israel"), how can you still maintain Christ (The true High Priest) did not make atonement on behalf of all mankind?

 

[BobRyan]

Surely you realize that world means many things in scripture. God so loved the world in John 3:16. Is that the same world that Jesus said He wasn't praying for in John 17:9..

John sets his own context.

John 1:10 - Jesus made the world
John 1:9 - Jesus is the light of the world and "enlightens everyone of mankind".
John 1 "He came to his own and his own received him not"

John tells us from the start of the global all-inclusive nature of Christ's work as creator and as Savior AND he tells us that Christ performed saving ministry for those who still chose to say "no". So in their being lost they cannot blame it on "well Christ did not die for me" or "Christ did not reach out to me" or "I was not able to accept salvation"... as if this is God's fault that they still chose to be lost.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan


Rom 5:12 Through Adam's sin - all became sinners
Rom 5:19 "the many were made sinners".

1John 2:2 "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins and not for our sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE World".

1John 4:14 God sent "His Son to be the Savior of the World".

The Atoning sacrifice made at the cross - was sufficient for all mankind -- the whole world.

He is not willing for ANY to perish but for ALL to come to repentance -- 2Peter 3

Jesus is the "light that coming into the world enlightens EVERY man" John 1

The problem in the Calvinist model is that it is not careful to note that the atoning sacrifice completed at the cross was sufficient for all mankind -- "the whole world" in all of time.

In Lev 16 the "Atoning Sacrifice" is prefigured in the sacrifice of "the Lord's goat" by the High Priest on the "Day of Atonement".
===========================================

This is not universalism -- rather it explains how it is that the MANY of Matt 7 are lost and the FEW of Matt 7 are saved -- and yet in 1John 2:2 Christ is the atoning sacrifice "for the WHOLE WORLD" for "God so loved the WORLD" -- "yes really".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[RAdam]

John 12:19 - "The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how he prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him."

Did every single person on the globe without exception go after Christ?

Matthew 3:5,6 - "Then wnet out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins."

Did every single person in Jerusalem, Judea, and the region round about Jordan without exception go to John and be baptized?


Here's an interesting thing to see for those who take world, all, and every to mean every single thing without exception. In Hebrews 2:8 it says this: "Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him." You see that? Scripture went through the effort to explain that all meant all universally without exception in that text. Why would that be necessary if the general rule was that was what all meant? Here's another example, John 1:3 says, "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." Again, scripture says all here means all universally without exception. I ask again, why the need for this if we are to assume that is what all means anyhow?

 

[RAdam]

...yet just a couple posts up you state "That sacrifice was a picture of the sacrifice of Christ." Now, if the OT sacrifice was a picture of Christ's sacrifice, and it was done on behalf of the entire nation (not just the faithful, righteous within Israel, remember, "not all Israel is Israel"), how can you still maintain Christ (The true High Priest) did not make atonement on behalf of all mankind?

Yes I can, because again Israel is a picture of the elect. Israel was the chosen nation of God, picturing the chosen people of God, the elect. The atonement made by the high priests of Israel didn't atone for a single sin. To ask if the atonement applied to every single person in Israel is to misunderstand what that ceremony was all about. It was about pointing people to the work Christ would one day accomplish as the great high priest, a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedec, one higher than the high priests of Israel. Whereas the blood of bulls and goats couldn't put away one sin, but rather brought them to remembrance, the blood of Christ was efficacious to perfect forever them that are sanctified, which by the way are explained in Hebrews 2 to be the same as those He calls brethren and the children given Him of the Father.

 

[webdog]

Yes I can, because again Israel is a picture of the elect. Israel was the chosen nation of God, picturing the chosen people of God, the elect. The atonement made by the high priests of Israel didn't atone for a single sin. To ask if the atonement applied to every single person in Israel is to misunderstand what that ceremony was all about. It was about pointing people to the work Christ would one day accomplish as the great high priest, a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedec, one higher than the high priests of Israel. Whereas the blood of bulls and goats couldn't put away one sin, but rather brought them to remembrance, the blood of Christ was efficacious to perfect forever them that are sanctified, which by the way are explained in Hebrews 2 to be the same as those He calls brethren and the children given Him of the Father.

Now you have run into a fatal flaw if you maintain the atonement of Israel is a picture of the elect. Not all Israel was saved, so you also have to maintain not all the "elect" is saved. Are you willing to go there? There were unbelievers within Israel, are there unbelievers amongst the elect?