Introduction

To me it is a truly amazing fact, even an astounding fact that many professing Christians including many Calvinists (cf. The Gospel of Grace in Acts 20:24, that is, the doctrines of grace or the five points of Calvinism) will draw swords over issues such as the length of the days of creation and the length of the millennium (which are surely minor issues compared to the doctrines of saving grace) but they will back pedal themselves into dead silence when it comes to the issue of the saving power of the death of Christ (which is surely a major issue of incomparable weight and importance).

A case in point is a book titled, The Cross of Christ (by J. Stott). There are many good things in this book; it is well organized, interesting, and clear. But the saving power or efficacy of the cross of Christ is passed over with amazing silence. The silence cries out for explanation. Something is definitely wrong with this silence; in its place there should be a clear voice, even a loud sound in honor to the Lord we represent.

The job of a representative of the Lord is to aim at what Paul aimed at: to glory in the cross and boast in nothing else.

But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world (Gal. 6:14).

For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified (1 Cor. 2:2).

I do not see how we can glory in the cross and deny the saving power of the cross. Nor can we glory in the cross if we do not exalt in its power; to glory in it is to speak of it with praise on our lips to the Lord of glory. Surely, to glory in the cross means to confess a good confession of faith regarding the work of Christ. So we cannot hide this truth under a bushel in blushing neglect. Instead, we must proclaim it from the housetops. On the one hand, we cannot deny it; on the other hand, we cannot be silent about it.

Now most Christians would agree and say, "Of course, we cannot deny the power of the cross of Christ while trying to magnify its glory and boast in the grace it represents." To this I say, "If only we were consistent but we commonly fail to be consistent." What I am getting at is the fact that we may speak and even sing about the "wonder working power of the cross" and about the "power in the blood" while we place human limits on this wonder working power.

We place human limits on the power of the cross when we claim that Jesus died for everyone while knowing that not everyone will be saved. But atoning grace means that everyone for whom Jesus died will be saved. That is the essence of the reformed doctrine of limited atonement: "The Cleansing power of the cross."

So today I want to discuss some questions that show that limited atonement though opposed by many is nonetheless good news.

1A. Why is it the case that this doctrine is confidently opposed on alleged biblical grounds?

There are probably two contributing and interrelated factors. First, and no doubt most popular, is an emphasis placed on universal language in what is often called the "universal passages" (those containing all, all people, world, etc.). I will discuss these passages another time. Second, the nature of the Lord’s work on the cross is not given due consideration. The universal passages are emphasized and the nature of the atonement is de-emphasized.

These two points make up the very important nature/extent contrast. Typically, Calvinists accent the nature of the atonement and work from that to the question of extent. But the opponents of limited atonement work from the extent of the atonement (its universality) to the question of its nature.

Thus, working from nature to universality, if the death of Christ saves then if He died for all, all must be saved. We know all will not be saved, so we know He did not die for all. In contrast, those who work from universality to nature will say, "If Christ died for all and all will not be saved, then the cross does not save. Instead, it makes man savable. Everything depends on what man does with it."

So if the nature of the atonement is not a controlling principle that governs how you read the Bible, then you will confidently oppose limited atonement. If the universal language is the controlling principle that governs how you read the Bible, then you will confidently and intuitively oppose limited atonement. I will argue that this is the wrong way to read the Scriptural account of the death of Christ. I will try to show that it is the nature of what He did that will help us understand the universality of what He did.

2A. What is needed to value working from nature to extent?

In answering this question, let’s base our thoughts on 1 Peter 2: 24, He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness.

1) We must think personally.

This may sound like we are working from the extent. In a sense we must try to do justice to passages that speak of Christ’s death for "many people" and passages that speak of His death for "all people." But I am not saying that we simply restrict the "all" passages by the "some" passages. To be clear, I am saying that we must restrict the "all" passages by the nature of the atonement not by the "some" passages (after all, it could be true that He died for some precisely because He died for all and if He died for all we know He died for some).

To think personally is not to think about a number of people (many and therefore not all). To think personally is to think about the nature of what was accomplished. It means that we accent the fact that "Christ died for" specific, particular, and real sins of specific, particular, and real people (for persons, personally). For example, think about the personal dimension in this claim: "He bore our sins in His own body on the tree." It is clothed with personal love.

2) We must think historically.

In the same claim, note when the work regarding our sins was done: "on the cross." It is not that the punishment for our sins (personally, mine and yours) is endured by Christ for us when we believe. Thus, an important distinction should be mentioned here between what Christ accomplished on the cross and the relation of that accomplishment to its application to needy sinners in the course of time. Application is made of something that happened on the tree.

3) We must think verbally.

By "verbally" I mean we must think about the words of action in the various passages; we must give due place to the verbs. Now consider the verb in the claim cited above: "He bore our sins in His own body on the cross." He bore them, not potentially but actually. The work of Christ is such that the wrath of God against our sins (personally) was actually endured (borne) by Christ in His own body on the cross (historically) so that it will be applied to us in our history.

Our punishment was in fact endured by Christ on the cross. So it is impossible for us to ever be punished for our sins. The cross is the guarantee of our release from sin in time and for eternity. Now let’s look more closely at the impact of His death on our release from sin.

3A. How is limited atonement taught in Hebrews 9:11-14?

But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent ( not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) ¹² he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. ¹³ For if the sprinkling of defiled persons with the blood of goats and bulls and with the ashes of a heifer sanctifies for the purification of the flesh, ¹⁴ how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

Let’s see how this passage shows that it is impossible that someone for whom Christ died could fail to be released from his or her sin.

1B. As we go to the text think personally, historically, and verbally.

First, there is a personal dimension. The writer speaks of our consciences being purified by the blood of Christ who offered Himself without blemish to God (some manuscripts have your). It is the death of the mediator that redeems them (v. 15; cf. Heb. 2:17, Christ was made like His brothers and sisters to make propitiation for the sins of the people, i.e. for their sins, the particular sins of particular persons).

Second, there is a historical factor that takes in both accomplishment and application. In verse 14, attention is given to the application of the atonement, the time in our experience when we are purified in conscience from dead works (v. 14), which is associated with being called (v. 15). It is the death of Christ that redeems (v. 15, "a death has occurred that redeems them") so we must at least conclude that this refers to the time of application that is rooted in accomplishment.

Third, consider the verbs in this context. We are directed back to the cross as the time of redemption. Specifically, in verse 12 we are told that the death of Christ obtained eternal redemption (v. 12, KJV). The redeeming work of Christ involved the securing of redemption when He appeared (v. 11) and entered the holy place with His own blood (v. 12).

2B. Now we can make some observations regarding limited atonement in this text.

1) Notice how it can be true that He redeemed us when we were purified and He redeemed us when He died on the cross? The answer is obviously found in the application/ accomplishment model. We are redeemed in our experience when "we are washed in the blood of the soul cleansing blood of the Lamb." But we can also say that He redeemed us by His blood on the cross because then and there He obtained, secured, procured, and guaranteed our redemption.

2) Furthermore, this way of viewing the nature of the atonement is confirmed by an argument set forth a fortiori. The blood of Christ is the reality of what was foreshadowed in the OT sacrifices. From this historical redemptive fact the writer formulates the fortiori argument that has this conclusion: it is impossible that the death of Christ fail to purify our consciences. If the shadows that have no reality nonetheless sanctified those to whom the blood of animals was applied how much more must the blood of Christ purify our consciences? Thus the redemption that was secured on the cross must be applied.

3) This application involves the purging of us from a dead conscience. That is, it purges us from being dead in sin, having unfruitful or dead works, and traveling the broad road to eternal death. It delivers us. This deliverance is the outworking of what was accomplished for us on the cross. The accomplished secured is efficaciously applied. It is impossible that it be otherwise. When He died He accomplished our salvation. On the cross, He secured our release from the bondage of sin and the tyranny of death. Accomplishing our personal redemption (redemption of persons) on the cross included the fact that the Lord secured the application to us of that redemption from the bondage of sin and the tyranny of death.

4) The release He secured is eternal (v. 12). Therefore, when redemption is applied to us bringing us out of sin’s bondage and death, it is applied in time for eternity (eternal blessing come from the great high priest of our faith in contrast from the temporary nature of the blessing of the OT rituals and shadows). Calvin says this in contrast to the inefficacious offerings of the OT: "the expiation made by Christ is always effectual and is the cause of eternal salvation to us" (Hebrews, 201).

5) Calvin then directs us to the goal of our redemption: "we are washed not to plunge ourselves again into new filth, but that our purity may serve to glorify God" (205).

4A. What do we mean when we speak of the power of the cross or say, "the cross saves"?

We need to think hard about how easy it is to deny the power of the cross. I think I can give some test questions that will show if you deny the power of the cross or if you affirm it. I can frame the questions in the language of the hymn we sang earlier. In the words of Cowper:

Dear dying Lamb, your precious blood shall never lose its power       Till all the ransomed church of God be saved to sin no more

1) Who is spoken of as ransomed by the precious blood of Christ? Obviously, it is the "church of God."

2) What will the cross do by means of its unending power? It will take the ransomed church home to glory (to heaven where there will be no more sin).

3) Now let me ask another question in this context: can any ransomed person (anyone ransomed by the blood of Christ) fail to arrive safely in heaven? If you say, "no that is impossible" then you at least profess to believe in power of the cross.

4) Your answer to one more question, a loaded question, will reveal what you actually believe about this subject. It is a question that simply substitutes "died for" in the place of "ransomed." It can be put like this: "Can any person for whom Jesus died fail to arrive safely in heaven?" Again, if you say, "no that is impossible" then you do in fact believe in the power of the cross.

5) Do you see what is involved here if you flip the coin over? If you believe that people that Jesus died for, paid the ransom price for, may perish in their sins, then you do not believe in the saving power of the cross. Instead, you believe that it is limited by man’s response to it.

6) Will everyone for whom Jesus died be saved? Cowper says, "Yes, Lord, your precious blood shall never lose its power till all the ransomed…be saved…"

7) Why must it be that all people for whom Jesus died will be saved? It is because the cross has saving power.

8) Let’s try to be clear on this matter by making a distinction between a negative question and answer, and a positive question and answer. Here is the negative side: Did Jesus die for every single descendent of Adam and Eve (including Pharaoh and Judas)? The answer is, "No, He did not die for every descendent of Adam and Eve for if He did then everyone would be saved due to the saving power of the cross. It is this negative side of the discussion that is boldly and accurately conveyed by the term limited atonement. This means that atoning grace is limited in its extent because it is unlimited in its power.

Therefore, on the positive side, we must stress the power of omnipotence that was at work in the cross of Christ and that flows savingly from it. It is the death of God that we are talking about; we are redeemed by the blood of God. Jesus is God the Son and His death is therefore of infinite worth, value, efficacy, and power. We must remember that it was required of Christ that He "become flesh" in order to die for us; but He had to be God in order to endure eternal punishment in our place in His death. That is why we must stress the positive. Instead of stressing what He didn’t do we must stress what He did do.

9) So, what did He do? He ransomed the church and His power is such that all the ransomed will be saved to sin no more. As Spurgeon put it:

…we are often told that we limit the atonement of Christ, because we say that Christ has not made a satisfaction for all men, or all men would be saved. Now, our reply to this is, that, on the other hand, our opponents limit it: we do not. The Arminians say, Christ died for all men. Ask them what they mean by it. Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of all men? They say, "No, certainly not." We ask them the next question—Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of any man in particular? They answer "No." They are obliged to admit this, if they are consistent. They say, "No; Christ has died that any man may be saved if"—and then follow certain conditions of salvation. We say, then, we will go back to the old statement—Christ did not die so as beyond a doubt to secure the salvation of anybody, did He? You must say "No;" you are obliged to say so, for you believe that even after a man has been pardoned, he may yet fall from grace, and perish. Now, who is it that limits the death of Christ? Why, you. You say that Christ did not die so as to infallibly secure the salvation of anybody. We beg your pardon, when you say we limit Christ's death; we say, "No, my dear sir, it is you that do it." We say Christ so died that He infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ's death not only may be saved but are saved, must be saved, and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved (Sermon on Particular Redemption, February 28, 1858, point V, italics mine).

Spurgeon had a way of emphasizing a point! He is emphatic in accenting what Christ secured when He died for sinners on the cross. He secured their salvation, salvation for them in particular, and with absolute certainty. That was all accomplished when He said "It is finished."

In summary of this teaching it can be said that atoning grace refers to the fact that when Christ died on the cross He secured, guaranteed, rendered certain, actually procured, and infallibly accomplished the salvation of each and every single person for whom He died. They were ransomed and they will be saved in time and for eternity.

5A. Why are many silent on this biblical teaching?

One answer is that it strikes a death blow to man’s autonomy. It shows that salvation is of the Lord first and last. We can claim no part in our salvation. It is not a matter of how we respond to the gospel; it is much deeper, it determines our response. But in our sinfulness, we want to decide our salvation by our own free will. And we do not like anything that squelches our sense of free will. But like no other teaching, limited atonement is decisive; it is an axe taken to the root of a tree. The proclamation of atoning grace surpasses the debate over free will; it preempts that debate. It proclaims a gospel of grace that puts every determining factor in God’s hands and not a single determining factor in our hands. This is the good news, the gospel of the grace of God.

Furthermore, this doctrine of the cross is directly and thoroughly confrontational. It says everything that needs to be said. When this teaching is embraced then there is no doubt about unconditional election, irresistible calling, or persevering grace. The death blow decisiveness of limited atonement is made crystal clear when we pull the sock inside out and work from the other doctrines of grace back to atoning grace. Over and over again, we hear of people who believe these other doctrines (all or in part) but who question the power of the cross. But once limited atonement is embraced then the truth of these other doctrines is also embraced. Thus if the atonement is limited in its extent because it is unlimited in its power, then unconditional election, efficacious calling, and perseverance of the saints are clearly, unmistakably, and undeniably true as well.

Addendum: On being redeemed from dead works (Heb. 9:12, 14-15)

We can outline "three main senses in which the works of the unregenerate may be described as "‘dead" (Philip Hughes, Hebrews, 360-61). 1) The works are dead because they proceed from fallen man who is dead in sin. Being dead toward God, the natural man is incapable of performing "living" works that are acceptable to God. This is the theme of total depravity again and it means that fallen man cannot do anything good and therefore he cannot do the good acts of faith and repentance. This is sometimes called the broad and narrow perspectives on total depravity. Broadly speaking, all you get from a corrupt tree is corrupt fruit (Matt. 7:18). The natural man cannot submit himself to the law of God, which means he cannot submit himself to God’s authority or to God Himself (Rom. 8:5-7). To grapple with this we need the helpful model of Van Til on what is required for a good act: the right standard (the law of God revealed in His commandments, exhortations, and warnings), the right motive (love for God and thus for the neighbor), and the right goal (the glory of God: the great end in whatever we do, whatever). Narrowly speaking, it is easy to see that if fallen man is incapable of anything good then he is incapable of the good acts of faith and repentance (which are commands with attached warnings and promises, cf. Acts 17:30). 2) Another reason that the works of the unbeliever are "dead works" is due to the fact that they are "essentially sterile and unproductive; they yield no living harvest." This is understandable since the natural man has "no regard for God who is the source of life." Thus, the works they do are "of time, not eternity; works of lust, not love; works of the flesh, not of the Spirit." 3) These works are "dead" because "they lead to judgment and perdition." They "spring from deadness and lead to death."

This identification of our works as fallen sinners reveals the radical nature of our predicament. We are in desperate need; we need two basic things spoken of in this passage: purification and liberation. The purification is from a pervasive and debilitating death. This death is also bondage. We need a radical deliverance, one that purifies from death by giving life and one that frees from sin and its corruption by giving liberty from the tyranny of death. In other words, we need a renewal in the depth of our being. Both of these needs are supplied by the death of Christ on the cross. By His death, He secured our release (redemption) from the bondage of sin and the tyranny of death. According to 1 Peter 2:24 we cannot separate the application from the accomplishment because it was on the cross that He secured (obtained) our release (redemption) from the corruption of sin and death in time and for eternity (eternal redemption). In other words, on the cross the Lord Jesus secured the conquest in time of our totally depraved hearts. Therefore, everyone for whom Jesus secured redemption on the cross will in time be set free from sin for a righteous battle with sin (cf. Rom. 6:17) until they reach heaven and are "saved to sin no more."

Accordingly, the death of Christ in fact obtained the church (Acts 20:28). As the writer of Hebrews puts it, Christ our high priest "obtained" eternal redemption by His own blood (9:12, KJV). Redemption (freedom from the bondage of sin and the tyranny of death) was obtained and forever settled and secured for those persons for whom Christ interceded on the cross, for His brothers and sisters (Heb. 2:12-17). It was obtained then and there once and for all (i.e. finally, fully, and decisively). The issue here is not merely the extent of the atonement but the nature of the atonement; the issue is not extent only but more importantly the accomplishment, nature, and richness of the gospel of the grace of God given by Christ for Paul and for us to believe and proclaim (Acts 20:24-28).