Limited Atonement - week 2, a defense of LA & defense of 4 pt Calvinism

Last Week on Limited Atonement

Questions raised – What did the Atonement actually accomplish: the ability for everyone be saved or the actual salvation of particular people.

Problem verses & can they be reconciled?

Does God love all people equally? Does the OT seem to be concerned with all people equally or the Jews in particular as His chosen people?

Did Jesus die for everyone?

Does God want all people to be saved?

@@@

Last week I gave the textbook defense for LA which comes down to a logical argument that GOD SUCCEEDS meaning: 1 – everyone for whom God intends Christ death & atonement to save is saved. 2 – those whom Christ has atoned for end up in heaven NOT hell.

This leaves us with 3 distinct options: need 2 volunteers

Arminians - Roy                                Amyraldians  - me                Reformed - Eric

Christ died for all                     Christ died for all                                 Christ died for many

The father has put all in          Father Elected some to be saved       Father Elected some

A save-able state                                                                               to be saved

HS woos all                            HS actually converts some                 HS actually converts                                                                                                              some

Most atoned for are in Hell      Most atoned for are in Hell                  No one in Hell is Elect                                                                                                             or atoned for

Christ died for those God        Christ died for those God                    Christ only died for

Knew would Not be saved     Knew would Not be saved                 those God knew

                                                                                                            would be saved

                                                Amyraldiansm like Lutheranism                      

                                                is both universal Atonement  

                                                & a Limited Election  

@@@

So what are we gonna do today?

Reiterate – that all Protestants (except Universalist heretics) limit the atonement

Arminians & 4 pt Calvinists – limit the Atonements success in actually accomplishing salvation & Reformed – limit its intent – it succeeds in saving a limited # of people it was intended for

Next we’ll look at some defense for limited atonement

Arguments against:

1 – Some verses state “whosoever will come” – will be saved. Arminians imply this means Calvinism is false. This is a straw-man argument since Reformed believe this too, they merely believe only the Elect will come when salvation is offered to all.  

The bible does explicitly declares God freely & sincerely offers Salvation to any who would believe – Ez 33:11, Ish 45:22, 55:1, Matthew 11:28, 23:37, 2 Peter 3:9, Rev 22:17. So all 3 are fine with offering Salvation to all knowing not all will be saved.

2 – Universal language – many passages in John speak of Jesus as the propitiation or Savior of the “whole world” 1 John 2:2, John 1:29, 4:42, 2 Cor 5:14-15 “He died for all,” 1 Tim 2:1-6 “ransom for all.” However other verses clue us in that 1^st Cent writers embellish for dramatic effect like Luke 2:1 – Caesar Augustus decreed “all the world” should be registered or Luke 2:3 so “all” went to be registered in his hometown. The Pharisees said in John 12:19 the whole world has gone after Christ! So unless you think all the world did repent & turn to Christ, we can see “all & whole world” doesn’t always mean all & the whole world.

3 – Defense of Amyraldians – believe in a hypothetical universalism = meaning Christ did die for all NOT just the Elect yet they also believe in a Limited Election = because God knew NONE would respond in faith on their own so He elected some whom He would impart saving faith to. *Amyraldians is not a heresy (Roy). It’s a school of theology that holds to 4 pts of Calvinism but not L – limited atonement. Named after Moses Amyrant & taught by Richard Baxter & was once popular in France, England & Scotland.

Amyraldians resolves many problems between Arminians & Reformed ideas namely the difficulty in reconciling passages that teach Christ died for all & the limited election of Calvinism. Christ died for all, salvation is offered to all equally BUT salvation has a condition – faith. Who ultimately is saved & has faith? God’s Elect.

God desires all to be saved 2 Peter 3:9, 1 John 2:2 quote & Rev 22:17 quote

There is an absence of verses that explicitly limit Christ’s atonement even verses like I lay down my life for my sheep do NOT say that I ONLY lay down my life for my sheep that’s the difference in saying I love Sandra & my girls & I ONLY love Sandra, I don’t care about my girls.

Closing quote - John Calvin had this to say about John 3:16 – “It is a remarkable commendation of faith, that it frees us from everlasting destruction…And he has employed the universal term “whosoever”, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such is also the import of the term “World”;…he shows himself to be reconciled to the whole world, when he invites all men without exception to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than an entrance into life.” Commentary on John, Vol. 1

Charles Spurgeon on Calvinism — Definite Atonement

from Nathan W. Bingham  

In Steven Lawson’s latest book, The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon, Lawson argues that Charles Spurgeon’s fervent commitment to the doctrines of grace “sharpened” his “gospel focus.” So what exactly did Spurgeon believe about the five points of Calvinism? Using excerpts from The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon, we’ll answer that question in what will be a five part series on the blog. Our prayer is that these truths will sharpen your gospel focus also.
Today we discover what Charles Spurgeon believed about the doctrine of Definite Atonement.

---

Charles Spurgeon strongly affirmed the doctrine of definite atonement. This truth teaches that Christ died exclusively for those chosen by the Father and, thus, actually secured the salvation of all those for whom He died. Such a definite redemption stands in contrast to the Arminian view, which claims that Christ did not actually save anyone in particular by His death, but merely made salvation possible for everyone. Spurgeon adamantly rejected this vague position: “A redemption which pays a price, but does not ensure that which is purchased—a redemption which calls Christ a substitute for the sinner, but yet which allows the person to suffer—is altogether unworthy of our apprehensions of Almighty God.” Such a nebulous belief, he insisted, grossly dishonors God, especially His justice, and distorts the saving purpose of Christ in His substitutionary death.
With clear thinking, Spurgeon summarized the unbiblical, illogical Arminian position with these words:

The Arminian holds that Christ, when He died, did not die with an intent to save any particular person. And they teach that Christ’s death does not in itself secure beyond doubt the salvation of any one man living. They believe that Christ died to make the salvation of all men possible; and that by the doing of something else, any man who pleases may attain unto eternal life. Consequently, they are obliged to hold that if man’s will would not give way and voluntarily surrender to grace, then Christ’s atonement would be unavailing. They hold that there was no secure particularity and specialty in the death of Christ. Christ died, according to them, as much for Judas in hell as for Peter who mounted to heaven. They believe that for those who were consigned to eternal fire, there was as true and real a redemption made as for those who now stand before the throne of the Most High.

Tweet thisIf it were Christ’s intention to save all men, how deplorably has He been disappointed! —Charles Spurgeon

Spurgeon strongly denied the idea that Christ died for all men: “If it were Christ’s intention to save all men, how deplorably has He been disappointed!” He added: “Some insist that Christ died for everybody. Why, then, are not all men saved? Because all men will not believe? That is to say that believing is necessary in order to make the blood of Christ efficacious for redemption. We hold that to be a great lie.” Elsewhere, he wrote: “Some say that all men are Christ’s by purchase. But, beloved, you and I do not believe in a sham redemption which does not redeem. We do not believe in a universal redemption which extends even to those who were in hell before the Savior died, and which includes the fallen angels as well as unrepentant men.” Such a defeatist view of Christ’s death had no part in Spurgeon’s gospel preaching.
To the contrary, Spurgeon held that Christ accomplished the saving mission for which He came into the world. He believed that Jesus came to save a definite number of sinners, namely, those the Father chose and gave to Him before time began. Spurgeon insisted that Jesus was not frustrated at the cross. In other words, Christ did not die in vain for any who die in unbelief. Rather, Spurgeon said, Jesus died triumphantly for all whom the Father had given Him:

We hold that Christ, when He died, had an object in view; and that object will most assuredly and beyond a doubt be accomplished. We measure the design of Christ’s death by the effect of it. If anyone asks us, “What did Christ design to do by His death?” we answer that question by asking him another—“What has Christ done?” or, “What will Christ do by His death?” For we declare that the measure of the effect of Christ’s love is the measure of the design of the cross. We cannot so belie our reason as to think that the intention of Almighty God could be frustrated, or that the design of so great a thing as the atonement, can by any way whatever, be missed.

It is clear that Spurgeon understood that the intent of Christ’s death defined its extent. He explained: “Christ came into this world with the intention of saving ‘a multitude which no man can number;’ and we believe that as the result of this, every person for whom He died must, beyond a shadow of a doubt, be cleansed from sin, and stand, washed in the blood, before the Father’s throne.” He added: “What! Did Christ at one tremendous draft of love drink my damnation dry, and shall I be damned after that? God forbid! What! Shall God be unrighteous to forget the Redeemer’s work for us and let the Savior’s blood be shed in vain?” Jesus did not die in vain, for none for whom Christ died will ever perish in hell.

Tweet thisJesus did not die in vain, for none for whom Christ died will ever perish in hell. —Steven Lawson

Though some call this doctrine “limited atonement,” Spurgeon insisted that both Arminians and Calvinists limit the atonement. Those who teach that Christ’s death made salvation possible limit its effect, while those who believe in a definite atonement limit its extent. Put another way, the former see an unlimited extent but a limited effect. The latter see a limited extent but an unlimited effect. Spurgeon explained it this way:

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. 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. You are welcome to your atonement; you may keep it. We will never renounce ours for the sake of it.

Tweet thisChrist came into the world not to put men into a salvable state, but into a saved state. —Charles Spurgeon

Summing up his reasons for holding to definite atonement, Spurgeon said, “I would rather believe a limited atonement that is efficacious for all men for whom it was intended, than a universal atonement that is not efficacious for anybody, except the will of men be joined with it.” Simply put, he held “that Christ came into the world not to put men into a salvable state, but into a saved state.” Spurgeon believed that the atonement was accomplished by an utterly triumphant death.

Charles Spurgeon on Calvinism — Irresistible Grace

Charles Spurgeon on Calvinism — Irresistible Grace

from Nathan W. Bingham   

In Steven Lawson’s latest book, The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon, Lawson argues that Charles Spurgeon’s fervent commitment to the doctrines of grace “sharpened” his “gospel focus.” So what exactly did Spurgeon believe about the five points of Calvinism? Using excerpts from The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon, we’ll answer that question in what will be a five part series on the blog. Our prayer is that these truths will sharpen your gospel focus also.

Today we discover what Charles Spurgeon believed about the doctrine of Irresistible Grace.

---

Charles Spurgeon affirmed the doctrine of irresistible grace. This is the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit, who convicts, calls, draws, and regenerates elect sinners. This work unfailingly results in the faith of all those chosen. All whom the Father chose in eternity past and all those for whom the Son died are those whom the Spirit brings to faith in Jesus Christ. None whom the Father elected and for whom Christ died fail to believe. The Holy Spirit grants repentance and faith to these elect sinners and ensures their conversion.

This irresistible call is distinct from the general call of the gospel. The former is extended only to the elect and cannot be resisted. The latter is extended to all who hear the gospel and is resisted apart from the Spirit’s effectual call. Spurgeon explained: “The general call of the gospel is like the common ‘cluck’ of the hen which she is always giving when her chickens are around her. But if there is any danger impending, then she gives a very peculiar call, quite different from the ordinary one, and the little chicks come running as fast as they can, and hide for safety under her wings. That is the call we want, God’s peculiar and effectual call to his own.” This effectual call always secures its desired effect—the salvation of God’s own.

God’s sovereign call, Spurgeon affirmed, is far more powerful than any man’s resistance: “A man is not saved against his will, but he is made willing by the operation of the Holy Ghost. A mighty grace which he does not wish to resist enters into the man, disarms him, makes a new creature of him, and he is saved.” This means no one is beyond the saving power of God: “Difficulty is not a word to be found in the dictionary of heaven. Nothing can be impossible with God. The swearing reprobate, whose mouth is blackened with profanity, whose heart is a very hell, and his life like the reeking flames of the bottomless pit—such a man, if the Lord but looks on him and makes bare His arm of irresistible grace, shall yet praise God and bless His name and live to His honor.” In short, no human heart is so obstinate that the Spirit cannot conquer and convert it.

Spurgeon described how the Spirit had conquered his own stubborn heart: “When He first came to me, did I not spurn Him? When He knocked at the door, and asked for entrance, did I not drive Him away, and do despite to His grace? Ah! I can remember that I full often did so until, at last, by the power of His effectual grace, He said, ‘I must, I will come in;’ and then He turned my heart, and made me love Him.” Just as the Holy Spirit turned Spurgeon’s heart, so He does in all those chosen by the Father, causing them to believe in the Son.

Spurgeon gloried in this triumph of God’s sovereign grace. God’s immutable will, he proclaimed, is far greater than man’s stubborn will:

Oh! I love God’s “shalls” and “wills.” There is nothing comparable to them. Let a man say “shall,” what is it good for? “I will,” says man, and he never performs; “I shall,” says he, and he breaks his promise. But it is never so with God’s “shalls.” If He says “shall,” it shall be; when He says “will,” it will be. Now He has said here, “many shall come.” The devil says, “they shall not come;” but “they shall come.” You yourselves say, “we won’t come;” God says, “You shall come.” Yes! There are some here who are laughing at salvation, who can scoff at Christ, and mock at the gospel; but I tell you some of you shall come yet. “What!” you say, “can God make me become a Christian?” I tell you yes, for herein rests the power of the gospel. It does not ask your consent; but it gets it. It does not say, will you have it? But it makes you willing in the day of God’s power.

Moreover, Spurgeon declared that irresistible grace makes even the most resistant hearts receptive to the offer of salvation. Listen to the enormous confidence in his preaching of the gospel:

If Jesus Christ were to stand on this platform tonight, what would many people do with Him? If He were to come and say, “Here I am, I love you, will you be saved by Me?” not one of you would consent if you were left to your will. He Himself said, “No man can come to Me except the Father who hath sent Me draw him.” Ah! We want that; and here we have it. They shall come! They shall come! Ye may laugh, ye may despise us; but Jesus Christ shall not die for nothing. If some of you reject Him there are some that will not. If there are some that are not saved, others shall be. Christ shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hands. They shall come! And nought in heaven, nor on earth, nor in hell, can stop them from coming.

Spurgeon was as courageous as a lion in proclaiming the saving message of Christ. He drew that courage from his belief that the Holy Spirit will turn the hearts of those chosen to believe on Christ. Simply put, Spurgeon knew that the Spirit guarantees that God’s Word will not return to Him void. Irresistible grace is triumphant grace.

Spurgeon - Unconditional Election

Charles Spurgeon on Calvinism — Unconditional Election

from Nathan W. Bingham   

In Steven Lawson’s latest book, The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon, Lawson argues that Charles Spurgeon’s fervent commitment to the doctrines of grace “sharpened” his “gospel focus.” So what exactly did Spurgeon believe about the five points of Calvinism? Using excerpts from The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon, we’ll answer that question in what will be a five part series on the blog. Our prayer is that these truths will sharpen your gospel focus also.

Today we discover what Charles Spurgeon believed about the doctrine of Unconditional Election.

---

Charles Spurgeon tenaciously held to the doctrine of unconditional election. By necessity, this biblical truth flows from belief in human depravity. Because the will of man is utterly dead and cannot choose God, God must exercise His sovereign will to save. Out of the mass of fallen humanity, God made an eternal, distinguishing choice. Before the foundation of the world, He determined whom He would save. Spurgeon contended that were it not for God’s choice of His elect, none would be saved.

Like all the doctrines that Spurgeon held, he believed this truth because he was convinced it is rooted and grounded in the Bible: “Whatever may be said about the doctrine of election, it is written in the Word of God as with an iron pen, and there is no getting rid of it.” In his sermon titled “Election,” preached on September 2, 1855, Spurgeon read many passages that unmistakably teach this doctrinal truth. Among the texts he cited and explained were Luke 18:7; John 15:16; 17:8–9; Acts 13:48; Romans 8:29, 33; 9:11–13; 11:7; 1 Corinthians 1:26–29; Ephesians 1:14; Colossians 3:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:9; 2 Thessalonians 2:13–14; Titus 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1–2; and 2 John 1. In this exposition, Spurgeon stated:

In the very beginning, when this great universe lay in the mind of God, like unborn forests in the acorn cup; long ere the echoes awoke the solitudes; before the mountains were brought forth; and long ere the light flashed through the sky, God loved His chosen creatures. Before there was any created being—when the ether was not fanned by an angel’s wing, when space itself had not an existence, when there was nothing save God alone—even then, in that loneliness of Deity, and in that deep quiet and profundity, His bowels moved with love for His chosen. Their names were written on His heart, and then were they dear to His soul.

Spurgeon further asserted, “God from the beginning chose His people; when the unnavigated ether was yet unfanned by the wing of a single angel, when space was shoreless, or else unborn, when universal silence reigned, and not a voice or whisper shocked the solemnity of silence, when there was no being, and no motion, no time, and naught but God Himself, alone in His eternity.” In eternity past, God sovereignly set His affections on a particular people and predestined their salvation. Moreover, sovereign election, Spurgeon affirmed, was based not on divine foresight but on divine foreordination: “‘But,’ say others, ‘God elected them on the foresight of their faith.’ Now, God gives faith, therefore He could not have elected them on account of faith which He foresaw.”

Spurgeon further denied that election can be dismissed as the choice of nations rather than individuals. He declared:

It is the most miserable shift on earth to make out that God hath not chosen persons but nations… .If it were not just to choose a person, it would be far more unjust to choose a nation, since nations are but the union of multitudes of persons, and to chose a nation seems to be a more gigantic crime—if election be a crime—than to chose one person. Surely, to choose ten thousand would be considered to be worse than choosing one; to distinguish a whole nation from the rest of mankind, does seem to be a greater extravaganza in the acts of divine sovereignty than the election of one poor mortal, and leaving out another.

Because God’s sovereign election of individual sinners is clearly taught by Scripture, Spurgeon insisted that it must be preached: “God gave me this great book to preach from, and if He has put anything in it you think is not fit, go and complain to Him, not to me. I am simply His servant, and if His errand that I am to tell is objectionable, I cannot help it. Let me tell you, the reason why many of our churches are declining is just because this doctrine has not been preached.” Spurgeon recognized that a refusal to preach the truth of sovereign election is a hindrance to the growth of the church. Such preaching is necessary if sinful men are to receive the seed of the gospel.

Moreover, Spurgeon maintained that withholding this great truth is a grievous offense against God:

Some of you have never preached on election since you were ordained. “These things,” you say, “are offensive.” And so you would rather offend God than offend man. But you reply, “These things will not be practical.” I do think that the climax of all man’s blasphemy is centered in that utterance. Tell me that God put a thing in the Bible that I am not to preach! You are finding fault with my God. But you say, “It will be dangerous.” What! God’s truth dangerous? I should not like to stand in your shoes when you have to face your Maker on the day of judgment after such an utterance as that.

From a positive perspective, Spurgeon boldly declared that preaching unconditional election is evangelistic. He said, “I have never preached this doctrine without seeing conversions, and I believe I never shall.” When people asked him how he reconciled preaching election with extending the gospel, he asserted, “There is no need to reconcile them, for they have never yet quarreled with one another.” He was right. Divine sovereignty and gospel evangelism go hand in hand, the former preparing the way for and ensuring the success of the latter.

While all in heaven are there by God’s choice, Spurgeon said, those in hell are there by their own choice. He testified: “From the Word of God I gather that damnation is all of man, from top to bottom, and salvation is all of grace, from first to last. He that perishes chooses to perish; but he that is saved is saved because God has chosen to save him.” In other words, salvation is possible only when God’s will liberates the human will from its bondage.

Charles Spurgeon on Calvinism — Total Depravity

In Steven Lawson’s latest book, The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon, Lawson argues that Charles Spurgeon’s fervent commitment to the doctrines of grace “sharpened” his “gospel focus.” So what exactly did Spurgeon believe about the five points of Calvinism? Using excerpts from The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon, we’ll answer that question in what will be a five part series on the blog. Our prayer is that these truths will sharpen your gospel focus also.
Today we discover what Charles Spurgeon believed about the doctrine of Total Depravity.

---

Charles Spurgeon clearly understood that before an evangelist can communicate the good news of salvation, he first must convey the bad news of condemnation. The black velvet backdrop of man’s sin must be laid out before the sparkling diamond of God’s sovereign grace can be seen in its dazzling luster. This begins with the Bible’s teaching on Adam’s sin, which brought about death.
But Adam’s sin did not affect only himself. His fallen nature spread to the entire human race, and every part of every person is fatally plagued by spiritual death. Spurgeon wrote: “As the salt flavors every drop in the Atlantic, so does sin affect every atom of our nature. It is so sadly there, so abundantly there, that if you cannot detect it, you are deceived.” He added: “The venom of sin is in the very fountain of our being; it has poisoned our heart. It is in the very marrow of our bones and is as natural to us as anything that belongs to us.” He believed that the entire person—mind, affections, and will—is polluted and poisoned by original sin.

The result, he said, is that “a very hell of corruption lies within the best saint.” Spurgeon recognized that sin lies deep within the souls of even the best of men. This inward corruption makes every man a savage beast: “There is no beast in wolf or lion or serpent that is so brutish as the beast in man.” All people are spiritually dead, unable to see, desire, or respond to the gospel message.
Regarding the will, Spurgeon said, “We declare on scriptural authority that the human will is so desperately set on mischief, so depraved, so inclined to everything that is evil, and so disinclined to everything that is good, that without the powerful, supernatural, irresistible influence of the Holy Spirit, no human will will ever be constrained toward Christ.” By this statement, Spurgeon affirmed that the volitional capacity of sinful man is paralyzed, leaving him incapable of responding to the free offer of Christ.

Consequently, Spurgeon resisted the notion of human free will. He contended that such an idea elevates man to the place reserved for God alone: “Free-will doctrine—what does it? It magnifies man into God. It declares God’s purposes a nullity, since they cannot be carried out unless men are willing. It makes God’s will a waiting servant to the will of man.” Further, Spurgeon affirmed, “If God requires of the sinner, dead in sin, that he should take the first step, then he requires just that which renders salvation as impossible under the gospel as it was under the law, since man is as unable to believe as he is to obey.” Simply put, Spurgeon believed that no human will is entirely free. It is either a slave of sin or a slave of Christ, but never free.
For Spurgeon, this was where the message of the gospel begins. The saving message of grace starts with total depravity. Man is entirely corrupted by sin. He is spiritually dead and unable to save himself. He could not be more hopeless and helpless.