It seems to me that the Calvinist idea (belief, doctrine, etc) that only a select few whom God has chosen has any opportunity of salvation and that everyone else is completely lost and has zero chance of salvation actually limit the sufficiency of the blood of Christ. Is this idea indeed saying that Christ's blood is only sufficient for a few and thereby is not powerful enough to cover the sins of all the world?
Brian, allow me the opportunity to convince you that Calvinism is right. There are a lot of things which you wrote above that lack good expression, and do not express very well what Calvinists believe. I hope to clarify things.
First, (I bolded the word opportunity) the word opportunity leaves things open to misunderstanding. Calvinists believe that when Christ shed his blood and died, it made salvation certain and completely secure for many. So for those who will be saved, it is not merely an opportunity, but a certainty. For those who will not be saved, it is not really an opportunity. We are all hard of heart and cannot believe, but God draws some to salvation (see john 6:44).
Second, the phrase "
actually limit the sufficiency of the blood of Christ." There is a sense in which Calvinists acknowledge that the value of Christs blood is infinite. When a sinner is saved, it simply does not lower the amount of grace that Christ has available. If all the people in the whole universe get saved, and then we multiply that figure by the trillionth power, it has not lowered the amount of the grace of God available by one iota. The issue is not how much grace is available, but to whom did he give this grace. Calvinists say God gave two kinds of grace. He gives common grace to all, but he gives his special elective and salvific grace only to the elect. While this grace is infinite, and saves the elect to the uttermost, it is all given to the limited elect. Yet if God had chosen to make trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions more elect, it would not lower the amount of grace he has. So then, the Calvinist sees the amount of Gods grace is infinite and superlative, but given all to elect. So then the scope of people that Gods saving grace is given to is limited, but the salvation is certain and infinite.
On the other hand, when you make the extent of God's saving grace to be given to all people everywhere, then the power of God's grace to save is obviously very limited. God did not save everyone (unless you are a universalist). So then, in non-Calvinism, God tries to save everyone, he just fails. I must say, because far less than half the worlds population is saved, in fact probably far less than half, God failed miserably to accomplish the salvation of all mankind. Such a weak and inefficient salvation rarely accomplishes what God intends.
On the other hand (how may hands to I have?), in Calvinism, Gods salvation is perfect and completely powerful to accomplish all that God intends. He saves his elect to the uttermost. The rest, God never intends to save and he did not send Christ to die for them. Who then "
limits the sufficiency of the blood of Christ." I would say the non-Calvinists limits the sufficiency of the power of the blood to save. Of course Calvinists limit the extent of the blood. So both are limited.
If Christ's blood is not powerful enough to cover the sins of the world, then isn't this idea saying that God is not all-powerful? Isn't this saying that Satan still gets most of the spoils of the world? If Christ's blood is not powerful enough to cover the sins of the world, then how can His blood facilitate victory over Satan, as alluded to in Revelation 12:11?
If Christ's blood, on the other hand, is powerful enough to cover the sins of the world, but God denies its application in the majority of sinners, doesn't this mean that the penalty has been paid for all sin (since Christ's blood is powerful enough to cover it all), but God prefers to let a large portion of it be spilled in vain? If not, why?
Thanks for your attention to my questions!
Well, at the end you have a good point. If the shed blood is intended for each and every person that ever lived, and most of them go to hell, that is certainly shedding Christs blood in vain. Such thoughts or frightening.
Again, notice the use of your term "powerful." I believe you used the term 5 times. Only in Calvinistic doctrine is the blood of Christ powerful enough to save all those under the blood.
Which statement seems most biblical?
*
Some which the Father giveth me shall come unto me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
*
Most that which the Father giveth me shall come unto me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
* John 637
All that which the Father giveth me shall come unto me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
Out of those given to the Son by the Father, each and every one of them without exception will come to the Son. Why is it universal?
John 6:44 says... "No man can come to me, except the Father that sent me draw him: and I will raise him up in the last day."
No man can come, yet verse 37 says all that are give to the Son will come. How will they come (vs 37), if they cannot come (vs 44)? Of course verse 44 provides the answer. God draws them.
At the end of verse 44 is the salvation provided for in the atonement. This is the power of the atonement. This is why the shed blood of Christ never fails to save.
So then, let me rephrase your original question. Let me ask you. Do you believe the shed blood of Christ is a weak failure that fails to save most people because of mans powerful free will? Or is man the weakling that is saved by the powerful God, and God never fails in that which he intends?
