I'm sure that all genuine Christians would agree that "And can it be?" is a great hymn, in which we confess our astonishment that the eternal Son of God should be willing to die for me; i.e. us individually, and personally. Which makes it so tragic when Christians reject the doctrine which teaches that Christ died for individuals personally.
I'm talking, of course, of so-called "limited atonement", a truth which has gained bad press because of the name it is given. The atonement has no limit, it is infinite, but it is also particular, and it is personal. If we deny that Christ bore the sins of the elect in particular, then all we really believe is that Christ died for sinners in general, and then I was elected to salvation. We can believe that Christ saved me, personally, but not that His death was for me, personally (or we can, but only with inconsistency). We need to uphold this truth, not just because it is true; not just because it is important; but because it is wonderful.
---
For those who are concerned at the supposed lack of textual support for this doctrine, I leave you witha a single text for a starter, Hebrews 10:13-14:
"Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." Here we see two groups of people: the enemies of God, and those who are being made holy. And what is the distinction between the two? Not faith; not election; not the indwelling Spirit. No, the only distinction given is that the sacrifice of Christ has already made those who are being made holy to be perfect in the sight of God. The sacrifice alone imputes righteousness, and only to the people of God.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Amen brother. I was somewhat distressed a few months ago when several members of my small group were rather uneasy about this doctrine. One of them has since left, saying that he needed someone else to take him to the next level. The reality, I suspect, is that he was feeling too challenged.
Sadly, this great truth can be too meaty for some to accept. We have to pray that God will bring them to maturity and act in the hope that God will do so.
Steve, thanks for a very helpful post! The specific nature of atonement does seem to be something Christians should exult in. Some are legitimately concerned about limited atonement lest salvation become pence-and-pounds. But your insistence that the atonement is infinite as well as particular is excellent and does much to allay concern.
Thanks to both Jon and Daniel for your posts.
Daniel, you're point "Some are legitimately concerned about limited atonement lest salvation become pence-and-pounds" is, I think, a good one; and it is the responsibility of those of us who believe in this glorious truth to present it well, and stress the infinity of the atonement.
But of course your argument can be easily turned upside down.
Let us assume that, as you say, Christ only died for the elect. How do you know that you are one? The answer is that you can't know with certainty. You feel a number of things which make you believe that you are saved, but how do you know that you are not deluding yourself?
Calvin had to acknowledge this: "I am aware it seems unaccountable to some how faith is attributed to the reprobate, seeing that it is declared by Paul to be one of the fruits of election; and yet the difficulty is easily solved: for though none are enlightened into faith, and truly feel the efficacy of the Gospel, with the exception of those who are foreordained to salvation, yet experience shows that the reprobate are sometimes affected in a way so similar to the elect, that even in their own judgment there is no difference between them. Hence it is not strange, that by the Apostle a taste of heavenly gifts, and by Christ himself a temporary faith, is ascribed to them" (Calvin, Institutes, III.ii.11; my emphasis)
This being the case, you can no longer sing joyfully "died He for me". You have to start inserting footnotes: "died He for [if indeed I am an elect], who caused His pain? For me [unless I am deluded], who Him to death pursued?". Whereas of course, if you believe Christ to be the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the (whole) world, then you can confidently sing the hymn, knowing that indeed he died for you!
This said without prejudice to the substance of the doctrine, just your particular point
Except that, of course, assurance of salvation is much more a tenet of Reformed orthodoxy than the doctrine of temporary faith.
Je suis voleur,
Thank you for your comment. However, I must say I disagree with you, and would like to explain why.
First, no true Calvinist believes that Christ didn't die for everyone in some general sense, just as Arminians/Amyraldians do. The ONLY difference between historic Arminianism and historic Calvinism is that AS WELL AS believing that Christ's death is a vailable and sufficient for any, the Calvinist ALSO believes in effectual salvation for the elect.
Secondly, unless someone who doesn't believe in "limited atonement" believes that all are saved, then the Arminian has the same problem as the Calvinist. How does he/she know that he/she has had the blessings of christ's general atonement applied to him/her? Just like the Calvinist, his/her assurance lies in the testimony of the Spirit with our spirit, and in the fact that he/she is bearing fruit.
I hope that makes sense.
P.S. I also agree with Liam - and, more importantly, so does Paul.
Although assurance of salvation may well be more of a tenet of Reformed orthodoxy than temporary faith, we do see it in the Scriptures don't we, those who seem to be part of the true people of God, who in some sense taste of the Spirit although are never regenerated and filled with Him, and yet fall away. Calvin is right when he says, "the reprobate are sometimes affected in a way so similar to the elect, that even in their own judgment there is no difference between them."
Surely an answer, then, to the question, "How can I be sure I am one of the elect?" is, in addition to the witness of the Spirit and fruit in one's life, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved." True, saving faith, is persevering faith. I do not, however, like some, suggest that perseverance is the mark of a genuine Christian.
I believe that talks by John Piper on the perseverance of the saints (available from monergism.com) are helpful on the issue you have raised Je Suis Voleur. He claims that whilst we cannot be glib about assurance (and someone who lacks it is still a Christian, contra some) it is still God's intention that we have assurance. The key thing is that we 'work it through' by the promises of the gospel and the scriptural grounds of assurance rather than a presumption based upon past profession.
It is helpful that Romans 8 expresses both the necessity of the saints to persevere (vs.18) and a full-blown sense of assurance (vs. 32, incidentally a text which supports the logic of limited atonement)
We can be sure and state with Paul that the Son of God loved me and gave himself me.
Guys,
By all means keep discussing the issue of assurance on this post (I'll probably write something more on it later); but, actually, I wasn't considering assurance at all when I originally posted.
For me, the fact that Christ died for ME is not primarily something to give me assurance - it is primarily something to marvel at. Whether or not believing in "limited atonement" increases my assurance is secondary; what matters is whether or not it causes us to worship God (and surely it does!)
Steve.
Unlimited Earnings Potential - http://1greatfuture.com
Our company is rapidly growing and offers you an extraordinary income helping others succeed. The primary requirement is to follow up on client inquiries and point them in the right direction. It is stress free, rewarding and straightforward work.
For complete details: http://1greatfuture.com
(Please feel free to delete this post if you don't want it on your blog. Thanks for the informative blog and opportunity to post.)
Post a Comment