Limited Atonement: Convince me, please!
“For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.”
2 Cor. 5:14-15
Today in my personal Bible reading, I spent some time in 2 Cor. 5-6. Coming across the above verse got me thinking about the doctrine of “Limited Atonement.” This passage definitely has something to say about the debate between limited and unlimited atonement – I’m just not sure what. I’ll say this for myself. I’m riding the fence right now on the issue. There aren’t a lot of well-known theological debates that I’m undecided on, but this is certainly one of them.
Really, I’ve always been an unlimited atonement guy. Without much reflection to be sure, but still. I could see where limited atonement was a good logical conclusion for a Calvinist to draw, but I wasn’t convinced from Scripture that it was true. You know what I mean? So, even though I’d come to accept 4 out of 5 points of Calvinism as Biblical, Limited atonement was just not compelling to me. But again, I hadn’t spent much time on it.
Lately though, it has come up a bit. Especially influential was hearing John Piper’s description of limited atonement. He said that “Christ’s death was sufficient for all, but effectual only for the elect.” Well, this moved me squarely into the undecided realm because it seems like a pretty hard statement to argue with Scripturally. Who’s going to argue that Christ’s death wasn’t sufficient for all? Or that it was ineffectual for the elect? No, the point of contention would be with the idea that His death was effectual only for the elect. I suppose that one would have to demonstrate from Scripture that Christ’s death is effectual for those who ultimately perish in hell. That just seems like a tough case to make. At least as tough a case as the Calvinist side of that coin. Anyway, this passage says something to the debate because it says that Christ died “for all” but it also says He died for the sake of those who live – possibly even those who live for him.
So, here’s the deal. I’m on the fence and many of you are not. You’ve settled on this one way or another. Where are you on this issue? I’d love to be persuaded. State your case right here in response to this blog.
Have fun and blessings to you!
Cody
Posted on
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
by Cody Lorance
filed under