The Christian Faith by Michael Horton

Author:Michael Horton [Horton, Michael]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 978-0-310-40918-2
Publisher: Zondervan
Published: 2011-04-08T04:00:00+00:00

4. THE EXTENT OF CHRIST’S ATONEMENT

For whom did Christ die? This is not a speculative question but one that receives considerable exegetical attention and has significant theological and practical implications. In fact, Arminian theologians properly recognize that if Christ’s death actually accomplishes the redemption of sinners (rather than simply making their redemption possible), then all of those for whom Christ died are objectively redeemed and will be brought to eternal life. According to John Miley, “The penal substitutionary theory leads of necessity either to universalism on the one hand, or unconditional election on the other.” Miley makes the charge that “such an atonement, by its very nature, and by immediate result forever frees them from all guilt as a liability to the penalty of sin.”.59 Thus, the nature of the atonement is bound up with the question of its extent. In broad terms, three main answers have been given in church history.

One answer is that Christ’s death objectively redeemed every person. The Scriptures unmistakably teach that God loves the world and that Christ died for the world (Jn 1:29; 3:16; 6:33, 51; Ro 11:12, 15; 2Co 5:19; 1Jn 2:2). Therefore, advocates of this first view conclude that it was Christ’s purpose to save each and every person who has ever lived or will ever live. Officially condemned in the sixth century, Origen’s theory of universal restoration (apokatastasis) held that all spirits (though not bodies), including Lucifer, would be reunited in heavenly bliss.60 Refusing to bind God’s freedom, Barth stopped short of a formal doctrine of universal salvation, although his doctrine of election and reconciliation suggests it.61 Confessional Lutheranism also teaches a universal and objective atonement, although it also holds to a limited and unconditional election. Only the elect will be finally saved, but some receive the saving benefits of Christ’s work only for a time and then lose these benefits through mortal sin or unbelief. In this view, then, not all of those for whom Christ died will be saved, in spite of the universal intention of his death. Yet the point of agreement among these proposals is that Christ’s death actually redeemed (objectively) every human being.

A second option is that Christ died to make salvation of every person possible. The intent of Christ’s death, according to the Dutch Remonstrants (Arminians), was to make it possible for God to offer salvation to believers by their grace-enabled cooperation: namely, their faith and evangelical obedience. A mediating position between the orthodox Calvinism defined by the Synod of Dort in 1618–1619 and Arminianism became known as “hypothetical universalism” (also “Amyraldianism,” after its architect, Moises Amyraut). Christ bore the sins of every person without exception, but since God knew that no one would embrace Christ apart from the gift of faith, he elected some to receive the benefits of Christ’s work. Many evangelical Protestants hold to either an Arminian or an Amyraldian view, in either case agreeing with the position expressed by Lewis Sperry Chafer: “Christ’s death does not save either actually or potentially; rather it makes all men savable.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.