Well, since the topic of this thread is limited atonement, I won't address the issue of Calvinism portraying God as unjust, but I will mention that it only appears to be that way from a human perspective. A few simple examples are all that is necessary to show that Calvinism is actually the
only just theology. However, I disgress, you were talking about the atonement.
The third point of the five-point acrostic TULIP is Limited Atonement. Of all the points of Calvinism this is the most hotly disputed, although I have never understood why. Limited atonement, or particular redemption, is the most obvious of all the points, and all orthodox Christian believe in the limited atonement of Christ's death. I'll show you how.
Ask your typical Protestant who Christ died for and he or she will most likely reply, "everyone." Fair enough. We then ask a follow-up question, "What was the effect of Christ's death?" Here there might be a couple different answers, such as, "He died so that anyone who believes could be saved," or, "He died to save the world." Now, since the entire world will not be saved, we can immediately discard the latter argument, which leaves us with an obviously limited atonement: "Christ died so that anyone who believes could be saved." This is the orthodox view of the atonement for all Christians. No one believes that Jesus's death on the cross atones for the sins of the unrepentant. If that were true, his sacrifice would be atoning for the sins of the unjust, the unrighteous. That would make God unrighteous because he would be accepting unjustified sinners into heaven. The Word is clear that we are justified by grace through faith. If a man has not faith, he has not grace. It is therefore impossible for God to justify a man without faith, which means that Jesus's sacrifice does not atone for his sins.
Now, there is a second side to the battle. Many have cleverly tried to avoid this obviously logical pitfall and argue that Christ's atonement was part of a "universal design" for the atonement, but that only those who believe will be saved, of course. However, this violates the laws of cause and effect. To say that God
intended for all men to be justified by Christ's sacrifice, but that some aren't, is to say that God is not sovereign. That is to say that there is something that God cannot do: atone for the sins of everyone. If God purposes to do something, it will be done. "For he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest Thou?" (Dan. 4:35 KJV). God's will cannot be frustrated. If I decide to get up and get a drink of water and God decides that I should drink iced tea instead, well, then I'm going to be drinking iced tea. There are no exceptions to this.
Furthermore, God
foreknows those who are his. God knows his elect. He knew them before he even created the world. For him to design Christ's sacrifice for
all men knowing that only the elect will believe makes absolutely no sense.
That would be unjust. It would not be a genuine offer. He would essentially be teasing people with the gift of salvation. All you have to do is believe in Christ and you will be atoned--but since he already knows that they won't believe, the offer has no meaning at all. It would be like offering someone a million dollars if they killed themselves. What in the world is the point of an offer like that? Even if they did kill themselves, they would neither be dead to redeem it, nor be alive to enjoy it. Such is the same as an offer of atonement to those who will never believe.
So you see the solidarity of the Limited Atonement doctrine stands firmly upon the rock. Knowing so plainly and honestly that the nature of the atonement is inherently limited, we can better understand the Scriptures that seem to contradict this by studying their immediate context and their biblical context.
I'll discuss two of the most commonly cited "proof texts" against Limited Atonement to set your mind at ease. They are 1 John 2:2, and the one you have quoted, 1 Tim. 2:4.
When we confer in 1 John 2:2 we need to consider other verses that clarify the point made. I was doing some recent study and came across a couple of verses that clarify the assertion of 2:2 very well.
John makes it clear in the third chapter of his first epistle that he is speaking of the elect of the whole world.
(1 John 3:5 KJV) And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
Jesus came to take away
our sins. That is, believers:
(1 John 3:6 KJV) Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
What John is saying is that to whoever sin is imputed, he has not been atoned, but those that have been atoned, to them sin is not imputed, for they are justified through faith. Moreover, this is precisely the purpose for which Matthew attributed his birth in his account of the Gospel, viz. that Christ came to atone for the sins of those who have faith (his people):
(Matt. 1:21 KJV) And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Additionally, Paul conveys the context of the passage in a parallel statement in Romans:
(Rom. 2:11-12) For there is no respect of persons with God. 12) For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
And then he continues:
(Rom. 3:25 KJV) Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Paul here says that the propitiation comes
through faith, not universally. Moving ahead a couple of verses:
(Rom. 3:29 KJV) Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
Here he sets the context of the promise: being to all people, Jew and Gentile. The promise of propitiation
through faith is made without respect concerning persons (Rom. 2:11), but is made according to God's good and pleasing will (Eph. 1:11).
The idea of a universal atonement that is applicable to those who have faith is logically indefensible. It is a cause without an effect. (It follows the same argument used by James against dead faith in the second chapter of his epistle.) A cause without an effect is meaningless, useless, and non-existent. There is no such thing as a cause without an effect.
1 Tim. 2:4 is explained much more easily. Let's have a look at the KJV of the verse:
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
This is an accurate translation, however, the imprecision of the Greek to English translation makes it appear that Paul is saying God desires that every one be saved. Of course, this is not possible, because if God truly desired that all would be saved, then all would. Instead, let's have a look at a much clearer, much more
literal rendering of the Greek. I'll cite the Analytical-Literal Translation:
who desires all people [or, peoples] to be saved and to come to a full [or, true] knowledge of the truth.
The Greek word being translated "men," or "people," or "peoples" is
anthropos. This word means many things. Here is the Thayer definition:
Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon said:
ἄνθρωπος
anthrōpos
Thayer Definition:
1) a human being, whether male or female
1a) generically, to include all human individuals
1b) to distinguish man from beings of a different order
1b1) of animals and plants
1b2) of from God and Christ
1b3) of the angels
1c) with the added notion of weakness, by which man is led into a mistake or prompted to sin
1d) with the adjunct notion of contempt or disdainful pity
1e) with reference to two fold nature of man, body and soul
1f) with reference to the two fold nature of man, the corrupt and the truly Christian man, conformed to the nature of God
1g) with reference to sex, a male
2) indefinitely, someone, a man, one
3) in the plural, people
4) joined with other words, merchantman
Part of Speech: noun masculine
What we see, rather clearly, is that "men" or "people" here refers not to all men individually, but to all peoples, that is, all kinds of people: both Jew and Gentile. This is the most common use of anthropos in the New Testament. It is a generic term used to refer to humanity. And, of course, this is very much true of God's grace toward all "kinds" of men. Again, this is much the same "problem" that we saw in 1 John 2:2 that was explained by Rom. 3:29. Paul is saying that God desires all peoples of the world, regardless of race, background, gender, or otherwise to be saved. His call is not limited to the Jews, but extends to the Gentiles, whereunto Paul was ordained a preacher and apostle (1 Tim. 2:7).
I hope that aids you in your understanding.
Soli Deo Gloria
Jon
boo hoo hoo! 
