If Jesus died, literally for all people; if this is a clear, dogmatic, universal truth throughout Scripture, then why does it not say that in
every passage where the topic for whom Jesus died, is it not stated that way? In other words, if its true, then it should be clearly stated in every passage that Jesus died for every person.
But it doesn't.
Instead Scripture clearly states that Jesus died for "many".
Isa 53:11 As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant,
will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities.
1Sa 3:12 On that day I will fulfill
against Eli all that I have spoken concerning his house, from beginning to end.13 And I declare to him that I am about to
punish his house forever, for the iniquity that he knew, because his sons were blaspheming God, and he did not restrain them.14 Therefore I swear to the house of Eli that
the iniquity of Eli's house SHALL NOT BE ATONED FOR by sacrifice or
offering FOREVER."
Heb 2:10 For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing
many sons to glory, to perfect the author of their salvation through sufferings.
Rom 5:15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ,
abound to the many.
Acts 13:
48 When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord;
and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.
Rom 5:19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One
the many will be made righteous.
Luk 2:14 "Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace
among men with whom He is pleased."
Rom 8:28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good
to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29
For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn
among many brethren; 30 and
these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.
Joh 17:9 "I ask on their behalf;
I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours;
Joh 10:11 "I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life
for the sheep.
Heb 13:20 Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd
of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord,
Act 20:28 "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, just as
Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her,
Mat 1:21 She will bear a son, and you shall call his
name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins."
Mar 13:20 And if the Lord had not cut short the days, no human being
would be saved. But for the sake of the elect,
whom He chose, He shortened the days.
Rom 11:7 What then? Israel
failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were
hardened, 8
as it is written, "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that
would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day."
Rev 5:9 And they *sang a new song, saying,
"Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were
slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men
from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.
Rev 13:8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it,
everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in
the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.
If Jesus died for all people, if His intention and desire was to save every single person, then why did Jesus hide the Gospel from some?
Luke
8: 9 His disciples asked him what this
parable meant. 10 He said, “The knowledge of the secrets of the
kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so
that, ”‘though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not
understand.’but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’
John 17: 12 While I was with them, I protected
them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the
one DOOMED TO DESTRUCTION so that Scripture would be fulfilled.
Isa 55:11 so shall my word be that goes
out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish
that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.
If Is. 55:11 is true about the Scriptures, how much
more true is it about Jesus and His work on the cross in His atonement!
So in all of these passages, why does it not say "all"--why does it not clearly state that Jesus did for all the people, including Eli's sons, the religious leaders of Jesus' day, and Judas who was prophecied to be the "one doomed to destruction"?
For a fuller treatment on the topic, go
here and
here.
Speaking generally, only two views or interpretations of the Cross have received much favor among the professed people of God: the one which affirmed that the Atonement was effected to make certain the salvation of all who believe; the other which supposed that atonement was made in order to make possible the salvation of all men. The former is the strict Calvinist view; the latter, the Arminian. Even here, the difference was not merely one of terms, but of truth over against error. The one is definite and explicit; the other indefinite and intangible. The one affirms an Atonement which actually atones (i. e. fully satisfied God for those on whose behalf it was made); the other predicates an Atonement which was a sorry failure, inasmuch as the majority of those on whose behalf it was supposed to be offered, perish notwithstanding. The logical and inevitable corollary of the one is a satisfied, because triumphant Savior; the other (if true) would lead, unavoidably, to a disappointed, because defeated Savior. The former interpretation was taught by such men as Wickcliff, Calvin, Latimer, Tyndale, Bunyan, Owen, Dodderidge, Jonathan Edwards, Toplady, Whitefield, Spurgeon, etc. The latter by men who, as theologians, were not worthy to unloose their shoes.
Of late, a new theory has been propounded to the Christian public, a theory which approximates perilously near that of the Universalists. Erroneously based upon a few texts whose scope is confined to the people of God, the view which is now rapidly gaining favor in circles which are regarded as orthodox, is to the effect that, at the Cross, the sin question was fully and finally settled. We are told, and told by men who are looked up to by many as the champions of orthodoxy, that all the sins of all men were laid upon the crucified Christ. It is boldly affirmed that at the Cross the Lamb of God did as much for those who would not believe, as He did for those who should believe on Him. It is dogmatically announced that the only grievance which God now has against any man, is his refusal to believe in the Savior. It is said that the single issue between God and the world, is not the sin question, but the Son question.
Now, you are aware that there are different theories of Redemption. All Christians hold that Christ died to redeem, but all Christians do not teach the same redemption. We differ as to the nature of atonement, and as to the design of redemption. For instance, 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, or 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 particularity and speciality 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 are consigned to eternal fire, there was a true and real a redemption made as for those who now stand before the throne of the Most High. Now, we believe no such thing. 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 any one 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 it. 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 of. We hold—we are not afraid to say that we believe—that 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 the shadow of a doubt, be cleansed from sin, and stand, washed in blood, before the Father's throne. We do not believe that Christ made any effectual atonement for those who are for ever damned; we dare not think that the blood of Christ was ever shed with the intention of saving those whom God foreknew never could be saved, and some of whom were even in Hell when Christ, according to some men's account, died to save them.
Now when we talk about the death of Jesus Christ then we are talking about an actual purchase. We’re not talking about a potential purchase, we’re not talking about a general sort of act on Jesus’ part that may in the future become a purchase. We are talking about a real purchase. It is the act of Christ dying on the cross that pays the price to God, purchasing the people who will be redeemed from every tribe and tongue and nation. Now what I want you to put in your mind is that the death of Jesus Christ is an act by which He purchases His people. It is not a potential act, it is an actual act. It is not a general act, it is a particular act.
Now all of that is very, very important because if you ask the average person for whom did Christ die? I think if you asked the average Christian, for whom did Christ die? If you asked most pastors, for whom did Christ die? The answer would be, “For everybody, for everyone.” That’s the typical belief. You hear people say, “Christ died for the whole world,” that means He died for every human being. And He wants you to receive that gift of His death personally on your own behalf. Jesus paid the debt on the cross for everyone’s sins, He paid the debt in full, He loves everyone equally. He wants everyone to be saved. And He waits for the sinner to turn a potential atonement into an actual atonement, or to turn a general atonement into a particular atonement, and the sinner can do that by an act of the sinner’s will. So much of evangelism is driven at the sinner’s will, crafted, manipulated to bring the sinner to a certain place emotionally, psychologically that he will activate his own will and accept what Christ has done and therefore turn a potential and general atonement into an actual and particular atonement.
So that view is that Jesus’ death on the cross was a death for everyone in general...listen...but a death for no one in particular. Okay? That’s the view. That is the standard view. We would call it an Arminian view but it’s the standard view, He died for everyone in general and no one in particular. In fact, you have the most popular Christian book in the last ten years, the author says, “I can lead anyone to Christ if I find the key to that person’s heart.” So it all depends on our technique and how good we are at identifying what moves people psychologically and emotionally.
Now let’s think about that a little bit. We need to work on sinners to get them to receive the salvation already purchased for them. That’s the idea. That’s the popular idea. The fallout of that idea is pretty serious. That means that hell is full of people whose salvation was purchased, right? That if in fact Christ paid for the sins of everyone who has ever lived, their sins were paid for. He died for their sins. He was a substitute for their sins, therefore hell is full of people whose salvation was purchased, whose sins were paid for by Christ. The Lake of Fire then will be filled with eternally damned people who suffer forever for their sins, even though those sins were already paid for. Christ then atoned and bore the punishment for the sins of the people in hell in the same way He did for the sins of the people in heaven. So the only difference between the people in heaven and the people in hell is that the people in hell are suffering double jeopardy on a legal level, their sins already being paid for in full and yet they’re there suffering for sins that have already been paid for, and they’re there because they didn’t have the sense or somebody didn’t make the right approach to activate them emotionally and mentally to turn the potential atonement of Jesus into an actual one. Therefore, the people in heaven can spend eternal life congratulating themselves, or congratulating whoever it was that moved them emotionally or psychologically to make the right call.
Does that sound like biblical theology? Did Jesus Christ do the exact same thing for all the people in hell that He did for all the people in heaven?
~John MacArthur
It is not quite apparent to me why the text of John 3:16 should be an argument against limited atonement. The passage does not say Jesus died for everyone, but only that the Father gave his Son for ALL THOSE WHO WOULD BELIEVE. It says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES in HIM shall not perish but have eternal life." Right? Don't we all believe this? That is why the consistent biblical Calvinists, when presenting the gospel to unbelievers, simply teach that Christ died for "all who would believe", which is actually closer to the meaning of this text than the erroneous position that He died for all in a general kind of way, and yet for no individual in particular. Instead, we believe that the benefits of the atonement will apply only to who will be believers, so he did not die for any person who would remain steadfast in their unbelief. So I would argue that John 3:16 actually supports the definite atonement position better than the indefinite position. They are reading into the text that Christ's death only potentially will save someone if they believe without the help and grace of the cross to do so. So in actuality, Christ died for no one in particular this scheme. His affection was only cast forth in a general impersonal kind of way rather then actually coming for His people who He set his affection on from eternity.
In fact, this teaching comes full circle and devastates all of the other doctrines of grace. Although claiming to believe in Total Depravity, the teaching of the so-called four-point Calvinists is really that man still has the moral ability to turn to God on his own without regenerating grace (a grace purchased on the cross) effectively destroying total depravity, even though the Bible plainly teaches that no one seeks God unless first born again (1 John 5:1; John 6:37, 39, 44, 63-65; Rom 3:11. 1 Cor 2:14, John 1:13; John 3). That is to say, natural fallen man has the ability and desire (in some cases) to believe in Christ without regenerating grace. It is teaching a "conditional" election since it depends completely on God's foreknowledge of whether or not we will have faith, even though the Bible plainly teaches that election is not conditioned on something God sees in us and that faith is a divine gift (Eph 2:5-8). So in effect WE end up choosing God with our autonomous free will in this scheme, not the other way around. Those who deny limited atonement are also surreptitiously semi-pelagian in all the other doctrines of grace as well. Salvation becomes the work of man, rather than a monergistic divine work of grace. Some may argue that God's grace works together with man, but the problem with this is that it still leaves the final decision for salvation in the hands of man. Faith, apart from Christ's work on the cross, precedes saving grace in this view, contrary to everything the Bible teaches (ROM 9:16; John 1:13). God's grace would take us part of the way to salvation leaving man's will to make the final decision. So, according to those who claim that the atonement is unlimited (indefinite) there is no divine election in the final analysis, but only humans electing God even though we all know that it is God that chooses us (John 15:16).
