A common statement about the Atonement of our Lord that needs a proper response:
Our Lord's active and passive obedience was not to a potential end, but to an actual end.
The view above is a general ransom view, a hypothetical universalism: Christ's death made salvation possible for everyone in the world, but it did not make salvation certain for anyone. It remains for the individual to make a free will choice whether or not to accept Christ's sacrifice. It is not the sovereign God’s providence which determines salvation, but human will.
This is contrary to numerous teachings within Scripture concerning the objects of Our Lord's atonement: John 6:37; John 6:39; John 10:29; John 17:11-12; John 17:9; John 17:22; John 18:9. For example, one cannot erroneously appeal to various 1 Tim verses about "all men" and ignore the full counsel of Scripture. These favorite "go to" verses of the anti-Reformed cannot stand alone.
We must qualify Christ's dying for the world. Christ died sufficiently for all, not effectually. There is the value of Christ's blood, and the virtue of Christ's blood. Christ's blood has value enough to redeem the whole world—but the virtue of it is applied only to such as believe. Do not go further and say that God ordains an hypothetical virtue for all men.
Hypothetical universalism teaches that God gave Jesus Christ to save all men on condition they believe; but it is clear not all men believe and will be saved. This view means that God the Father gives Jesus Christ to all men but then takes Our Lord away from some men. Christ's merits call for faith and justification but God the Father says "No" to His dearly beloved Son. Hypothetical universalism teaches that God the Father is actually not well-pleased to save all men for whom Christ died. This is a distortion of the gospel of free grace.
For me, the non-Reformed idea of an Atonement that was FOR me (and FOR all other men without distinction), but nevertheless could not be EFFECTIVE for me, depending on some factor, like my own "wise" choice, other than the will of God for my salvation, is intolerable. Given my natural condition, I need an Atonement that actually finds and saves me, not and Atonement that is mine (no less than anyone can claim) but might not finish the job.
Think about it.
AMR
Not a few folks react wrongly when limited atonement is mentioned, failing to see their own versions of limited atonement. Those who deny the Reformers view what Scripture teaches about limited atonement have a limited atonement of their own: some for whom Christ died are not saved by his death; His death accomplishes nothing for them. It is an ineffectual atonement, so far as they are concerned. Hence a limited atonement.
Our Lord's active and passive obedience was not to a potential end, but to an actual end.
The view above is a general ransom view, a hypothetical universalism: Christ's death made salvation possible for everyone in the world, but it did not make salvation certain for anyone. It remains for the individual to make a free will choice whether or not to accept Christ's sacrifice. It is not the sovereign God’s providence which determines salvation, but human will.
This is contrary to numerous teachings within Scripture concerning the objects of Our Lord's atonement: John 6:37; John 6:39; John 10:29; John 17:11-12; John 17:9; John 17:22; John 18:9. For example, one cannot erroneously appeal to various 1 Tim verses about "all men" and ignore the full counsel of Scripture. These favorite "go to" verses of the anti-Reformed cannot stand alone.
We must qualify Christ's dying for the world. Christ died sufficiently for all, not effectually. There is the value of Christ's blood, and the virtue of Christ's blood. Christ's blood has value enough to redeem the whole world—but the virtue of it is applied only to such as believe. Do not go further and say that God ordains an hypothetical virtue for all men.
Hypothetical universalism teaches that God gave Jesus Christ to save all men on condition they believe; but it is clear not all men believe and will be saved. This view means that God the Father gives Jesus Christ to all men but then takes Our Lord away from some men. Christ's merits call for faith and justification but God the Father says "No" to His dearly beloved Son. Hypothetical universalism teaches that God the Father is actually not well-pleased to save all men for whom Christ died. This is a distortion of the gospel of free grace.
For me, the non-Reformed idea of an Atonement that was FOR me (and FOR all other men without distinction), but nevertheless could not be EFFECTIVE for me, depending on some factor, like my own "wise" choice, other than the will of God for my salvation, is intolerable. Given my natural condition, I need an Atonement that actually finds and saves me, not and Atonement that is mine (no less than anyone can claim) but might not finish the job.
Think about it.
AMR
