"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 infallibly to secure the salvation of anybody."
Here Spurgeon highlights the key issue for any consideration of the atonement - its nature, its design.
This crystallizes the debate between the Arminian and the Calvinist. Did Christ die in order to make it possible for men to be saved, or did He die in order to save?
The Arminian, given his defective view of the natural man's ability, teaches that God intended, in sending Christ, to give every man a chance to be saved. The Calvinist, given his scriptural views of man's natural inability, believes that if a chance is all that is offered, none will be saved whatsoever. No, if any are to be saved, they are saved by a work wrought of Divine power (cf. Romans 1.16). The Calvinistic doctrine teaches an atonement that really atones.
P. 173-174, The Gospel According To Dispensationalism by R.C. Kimbro, available from the Sovereign Grace Advent Testimony (SGAT) London.
No comments:
Post a Comment