Limited Atonement and the resurrection of the nonelect

So are you understanding the resurrection of the non-elect to be of the same quality as that of the elect?

Just want to get some clarity on what you believe so that you get an answer to you are asking and not an answer to a question that you are not asking....

I think the elect's ressurected bodies will mirror in some way (not at all that clear to us now) Christ's ressurected and glorified body. The non-elect are not going to get a glorified body but scripture is clear (to me anyway) that they will get a body of sorts. Their resurrection however limited has to have been obtained through Jesus sacrifice, so how does reformed theology percieve that they were gifted this by God and why?


I cut and pasted from you in the above quote because the quote function doo-dad isn't working today, so onward........


Yes the elect will be resurrected with a body that shares the same qualities as Christ's, 1 Cor 15:42, 1 John 3:2


The non-elect, who died in there sins, ( John 8:24 ), are raised in a body that is in a state of and will eternally be, perishing, ( John3:36, 2 Thess 1:8-9, Matt 25:41 )


Now here I think is where you are going off track, the non-elect are not raised because of Christ's atonement or Resurrection, they are raised for judgement, (John 5:29), they receive no benefit from Christ's salvific work, many will receive a greater punishment because of their denial of it.

You asked how limited atonement figures in with the resurrection of the non-elect, it doesn't.


I have to make an assumption that you are misunderstanding Romans 5, and possibly 1 Cor 15, and you have drawn a very consistient conclusion with that misunderstanding, keep in mind that Adam's sin had a universal effect, Christ's death on the cross did not have a universal effect, if it did, there would be no non-elect, no one would be judged for their sins.............


Is that helping any, or just muddying things up more, I'm glad to answer any questions or go into more detail.............

Ok, I wasn't meaning to be unkind, but I have seen many people read thru those chapters and come out with their hat on backwards, forgetting the thrust of the whole chapter/book, and winding up in a confused state of quasi-universalism, I hope that is not the case with you.


You may have misunderstood, the resurrection of the non elect is not punishment, it is for judgement, leading to punishment, and does not run contrary to the OT or the NT, Dan 12:2, Prov 16:4, John 5:29, Acts 24:15, Rev 20:12-15, I agree the main thrust is to the positive, The hope of resurrection, the full manifestation of the Kingdom of God, Everlasting Life, God dwelling with His people, & much more, but those promises are to believers, God's people, the elect. The negative is also there, the resurrection of judgement, for the non elect, the non believer, still in their sin, unrighteous, not justified before God, outside of Christ, there are no positive promises made to them, only the promises of death, judgement, punishment and hell, no grace.


I'm intrigued, I've never heard anyone refer to the raising of the unbeliever, as a grace, or a gift, that's a new one on me.


As to the decoupling, Christ certainly has the power and authority to raise them, and I believe they are raised in that way, BUT, they are not raised in union with Christ, they are not said to be raised with Christ or in His likeness, they do not receive the resurrection of life, they died in unbelief and will be raised the same way and be made to bow the knee to Christ and confess that He is Lord, they are resurrected for a court date with the Supreme Judge, they will not receive grace, only wrath, You cut off the quote of John 11:25 too soon,



Joh 11:25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,
Joh 11:26and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?"



He is the resurrection and the life , to those that believe, what is He to those that do not believe? He is their Judge, He will raise both groups, but what a difference to be raised in Him, with Him and by Him, than to be raised by His power for judgement.................

Wright tends to talk about the development of the theology at Jesus' stage, and attributes other developments after Jesus' time.

I think in applying this idea you'd start to get the idea of the Resurrection the way Scripture as a whole would see it. As Jesus' Resurrection is developed as an event in history, it becomes very quickly a sign not simply of good news, that we can live forever. Instead it becomes a sign of impending judgment on the nations:
Jesus' betrayal at the hands of Judean leaders was similarly framed:
The ascendancy of Jesus to His Kingdom is clear, as is the sharp demarcation line between the resurrected Jesus and those who offended Him by killing Him.

The Resurrection is recognized in this way by other passages in the Gospels as well, though I believe Wright considers them injected from a later time, but I'm not sure he thinks that of all of them. It's been awhile since I read JVG, and I don't agree with Wright on all the particulars. In any event Matthew 25 comes to mind:
The idea of a Final Judgment would have no impact if there were no one to condemn. I would feel pretty confident that First Century Judaism recognized and understood this as the logical outgrowth of a Final Judgment. Initially the Resurrection of Christ would have been clear indication of both the vindication of those who turned loyal to the Messiah, and the condemnation of those who rebelled against His reign. This idea shows most clearly to me in the condemnation passages in John. Even if this were a developed idea by 100 AD, John's clearly putting these words in Jesus' mouth. John's characterization of Jesus as not presently condemning, but the Future Condemner, in places like John 3:16ff, John 8:10-11, and ... I'm also thinking of a verse or two in John 5:19ff:

There's no indication that the non-elect will live again after physical death. Only the elect have victory over death and the grave Non-elect do not obtain eternal life at all. Look in the book of Jude where Sodom and Gomorrah, including the cities near them, they were destroyed by eternal fire from God. Do you think they'll rise again, after suffering from the vengenance of God via eternal fire No, they're forever destroyed.

It would be injustice to give eternal life to the non-elect becaues it is some life form after physical death.

When we look at John 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

So for those who don't believe on Jesus, would this apply to them when it says "yet shall he live". Think about it for a moment. Wouldn't that be contrary to that verse.

Thought about it,




Dan 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.


Then thought some more,


Act 24:15 having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust.


All the dead will be raised......................

2 Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

On the last day in earth existence, God will utterly destroy the entire universe including the devil and the fallen angels, along with the unsaved with fire being sent by God.

Remember God has the power to destroy body and soul in hell.

Mt 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.


That's the whole work of salvation to live again, to receive a new spirit/soul essence and a new body which will become incorruptible. Without salvation, you die in a corrupted spirit/soul essence and with a body returning to its original form which is dust.

To live again, you need another soul and body to become incorruptible, how would a curse soul/body become reversed from being curse in its current condition?

James1979, there's a reason why this forum is split off from the "Debate a Calvinist" forum. If you'd like to debate Calvinists over there, that's fine. This forum is for asking questions, not contradicting the postings.

Calvinists generally don't pit Scripture against Scripture, but look for the understanding which includes both Scriptural references with viable meanings for both. As a result, the Scriptures cited so far point directly to the resurrection of the unjust; the resurrection to condemnation.

Scripture is explicit about the resurrection of the just and the unjust. The resurrection of the unjust is not to reverse the curse. It's to mete out the proper punishment for sin.

Well the proper punishment is the second death which is physical death. Because the first death has already happen which is spiritual death. My mistake for debating in here.

Mmm, I would think Jesus' comments about God's ability to throw both body and soul in Hell is relevant, here. Were the proper punishment committing the body to separation from God in Hell, then the body must be resurrected. Death isn't extinction. Death is corruption.

And the soul remains to be punished. Moldering in the grave, in extinction and not in punishment, isn't what God has in mind for punishing evil.