Limited Atonement - is it Biblical?

[truthnluv]

truthnluv,

Let me first say I'm really enjoying this thread. If nothing else it has caused me to ask why I believe certain things rather than just believing them, ignorant of intelligent reason. I was wondering if you could give me some clarification regarding some of your beliefs.

I'll admit, the scriptures seem plain in saying that Grace and Mercy are in fact attributes of God and that the cross was the end result of them rather than the other way around...but perhaps that's the thing making this whole discussion somewhat difficult. If the cross made possible grace and mercy then yes, it follows that there was a benefit in it even for the unsaved. If, however, Grace and Mercy are attributes of God prior to or seperate from the cross then it becomes a thing somewhat different.

Could you perhaps, then, enlighten me as to exactly what causes you to believe that the cross made grace and mercy possible as opposed to them being attributes of God?

In Christ,

Eric

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hello, book wirm. There are several ways I could answer your question, but let's take the simple approach; Let's look at the BIG PICTURE.

God does whatever He wants. He does not adhere to some giant rulebook in the sky... He is the rule book. Whatever pleases God is righteous and whatever displeases God is sin. There are no other factors in determining right from wrong.

When God says that He is just He simply means that He will do whatever He said He will do according to the the guidelines that He Himself has established and according to His own sovereign will. Justice is when God enforces the Laws that He Himself has established.

When God told Adam, "The day that you eat(disobey me) you will die", then that is exactly what must have happened or God is not just. God did not have to make this law, but He did. And since He said it He had to carry it out; That is justice.

Aha!... But that did not happen... How is it then that God is still just?... How could God(in mercy) not do what He said He would do? More precisely, how could God undo the judgement that Adam brought upon himself? That is the question. And the answer is Jesus crucified!

God does not lie, so He will always do what He says. Every single sin must be punished with eternal death because He said they would be.

So, justice simply means that God will do what He said He will do. Now that we've established what God's "justice" is, let's move on:

Now, God said that the penalty for sin is eternal death. And we all sinned in Adam. Therefore, according to God's own rules, we must all be punished with eternal death. This is justice. For God to allow one single sin to go unpunished with eternal death would be injustice, by His own decree. You see, God is the one who established the parameters of His justice... He decreed it, so it must happen exactly the way He decreed.

Mercy is the withholding of Judgement. But God did not really withhold His judgement. He did exactly what He said He would... He punished each and every sin with eternal death... He made the soul of His only begotten Son an offering for sin... In effect, God paid the His own penalty Himself! This terrible judgement has been withheld from you and I... But judgement has not been withheld overall. Christ tasted death on behalf of every man.

If God says the penalty for sin is eternal death, but then he doesn't carry it out then what does that make Him? Of course, it would make Him a liar and unjust. But since it is impossible for God to tell a lie and He is just, He did punish every sin with eternal death through the substitutionary death of Christ... And this is the only reason that you and I can recieve mercy... the withholding of judgement; Because of the Cross of Christ.

And since Christ was the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world", meaning it was always in God's mind as imminent, He has always dealt with people in the light of it's predestined occurence.

Well, that may or may not seem so simple. If not, I apologize. Sorry(smile).

Truthnluv

Edited May 26, 2005 by truthnluv

[book_wirm]

When God told Adam, "The day that you eat(disobey me) you will die", then that is exactly what must have happened or God is not just.    Aha... But this did not happen...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmmm

[EricH]

The problem with an issue like this is that the reason for the "seeming" change in what God warned about, is not in the text. So if the exegete believes something different happened than what God first indicated, they will have to read a reason back over the text.

First, I agree with Truth. If God threatened death and it did not happen, we are left with two options:

1. God lied - that we know is impossible

2. We must find a biblical reason why God acted differently than He said He would.

I would add a third:

3. God did exactly what He said He would. We misunderstood what He said.

Truth's assertion is that since God did not act to end Adam's and Eve's life, that was an act of mercy. He deferred punishment for sin. The only way God can do that is through Christ's blood. So mercy was not an attribute, it was a result of the cross made retroactive to Adam and Eve.

This is internally logical with Truth's theology.

Here is how I approach this text.

1. I see that God promised death to Adam and Eve if they ate of the tree (Genesis 2:17)

2. I also look to Genesis 3 and see that neither Adam or Eve died physically immediately.

My inclination at this point is to think that maybe I misunderstood what God meant by death and to look to the immediate context to see if that is the case. If we look to Genesis 3 we see that God immediately pronounces sentence on them:

1. The curses specific to women - pain in childbirth and seeking to rule over their husbands (14-16)

2. The curses specific to the man - difficulty in fulfilling command to have dominion over the earth (17-19)

3. Separation from God - (23-24)

My understanding is that God's definition of death is detailed here. Namely that they were now separated from God. Everything else is a symptom of the sentence (break down in relationships, decay etc.) Physical death is just a symptom of the punishment. In other words Adam and Eve did die that day. They were removed from the fellowship and sustaining power of God. That day a symptom of this separation (physical death) began in their bodies, because God was no longer sustaining them.

This interpretation allows the immediate context to determine the meaning rather than having to remove attributes from the character of God, and read concept back over tha passage that the context does not demand. As stated earlier there are numerous scriptures that indicate that grace and mercy belong to God as an attribute.

This understanding of "death" as a theological construct is supported in the NT where Paul states that we were all dead in our trespasses and sin. Obviously we were physically alive, but we were separated from God. Also Jesus Himself indicated that physical death is secondary to spiritual death.

The main punishment was not cessation of life. That was a symptom. The main punishment was separation from God which was executed immediately. In fact a repeating theme in scripture is people thinking God is lax in judgement because he does not take people immediately. Peter indicates that it is God's attribute of Patience that governs this not His mercy. It is His patience because God knows that physical death is just the symptom. It is eternal spiritual death that is the real sentence. Thus God is patient because He wants to give people every chance to avoid the final sentence. He is not suspending his justice, because justice has already occured. They are separated and judged "already", awaiting the final "incarceration". The only way this sentence can be removed is by appropriating the work Christ did on the Cross. He underwent physical death as well as separation from the Father. He paid the price in full

The structure of the listing of the punishments also supports this interpretation in that in the book fo Genesis the most important is frequently listed last (i.e. in creation man is created last). This is not proof it is just support.

[truthnluv]

I agree with you that God's love motivated Him to send Jesus. But He did not suspend His other attributes to do so. They all conditioned His eternal decree. His mercy demanded it because it is in His nature to be merciful.

Do you agree that God's justice is simply God doing what He said He would do? In effect, God adhering to His own rules that He Himself created? If so, then wouldn't your quote be like saying, 'it is in God's nature to not adhere to His own laws'.

Don't get me wrong, I believe God always intended to show us mercy... But this mercy came at a great cost... Someone had to pay dearly and that someone was Jesus Christ. So, God never actually held back His judgement towards sin...

So, God's mercy to you is contingent upon the suffering of someone else.

Another verse I am considering in this discussion is 2 Peter 3:9

The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Clearly the context here is why hasn't the Lord returned yet. Peter seems to be indicating that God is patient (clearly an attribute) not wishing for any to perish. So His attribute of patience is why He does not just return now and exercise judgement.

Could He have exercised this patience without the cross? Or would He have been required by his justice to immediately punish? I'm not sure. But if I land at the place where I say, "No, He could not have demonstrated this patience without the cross"; does it demand that I remove it as an attribute?

2Pet.3:9 is discussing Christ return in relation to His promise to His elect. That is the context. Peter says that God is longsuffering toward "us". Peter is talking about the elect not the world. If Peter was refering to the world he would not include himself nor the believers in that group by saying "us". He already dealt with that group(the world) distictly in verses 3-7.

"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any [of us] should perish, but that all [of us] should come to repentance.

If God came right now some of His elect would be lost, meaning they would never get a chance to be born, not to mention, come to repentance. That is what God is waiting for.... and it's for the benefit of the elect. When the last of God's elect of the Church Age comes to repentance then the "fullness of the gentiles" will be complete. Then the Church will be raptured and the time of Jacob's Trouble(Tribulation) will begin. God will resume His dealings with Israel.

I hope nobody is alarmed by the fact that the word "us" is not used all throughout the verse. This is a common practice throughout the Bible(and by all speakers of every language, actually) called ellipsis. A word is left out for poetic reasons, the flow of the text, or conciseness, and must be filled in by the reader based on the context. Every word you see that is in italics in you Bible was not in the original... It was added by the translators for clarity.

Another verse I am considering is James 5:11

Behold, we count those blessed who endured. You have heard of the endurance of Job and have seen the outcome of the Lord's dealings, that the Lord is full of compassion and is merciful.

If you

Edited May 26, 2005 by truthnluv

[truthnluv]

Hmmm

Edited May 26, 2005 by truthnluv

[EricH]

This really is a great discussion

[EricH]

Do you agree that God's justice is simply God doing what He said He would do?

[EricH]

You believe that the construction means something more in Greek than it does in English?  Both languages say God is compassionate and merciful.  I also believe God is compassionate and full of mercy...  At the expense of Christ.  Christ was judged for every sin so people don't have to be.

God Bless!

Truthnluv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not at all. There is just such a preponderance of verses that talk about God's mercy and His grace, or that state God acted out of His mercy, that I find it difficult to maintain they are not attributes. I also find no place where it is taught in scripture that God's mercy is something outside himself (i.e a product of an historical event). My only point is quoting this verse is to show that the writer seems to be pointing to the fact that they are part of who God is. He is full of compassion. He did not become compassionate, or exercise compassion because of an external event.

I think part of the issue may be that you have defined mercy and compassion too narrowly. God's forgiveness is a merciful act, but it does not encompass the entire definition of mercy. God's free gift of salvation is an example of grace. But it does not embody all that is "graceful" about God. These actions were driven out of His attributes of grace and mercy.

Another assumption you have made is that if God does not take the life of an idividual instantly, that would be a violation of His justice with-out the cross. From my post regarding Genesis, I maintain that the real sentence was separation, and physical death a symptom of the ultimate sentence. That is why Jesus told people not to fear those who could take your life, but He who could take the soul.

[EricH]

You believe that the construction means something more in Greek than it does in English?

[EricH]

I would suggest to you that God can do whatever He wants.  If He said, 'I will not punish sins that have been paid for', then you would have a case.  However, God punishes sins that have been paid for all the time.  When you sin and God chastises you... Haven't those sins been paid for?  When Mariam got turned into a leper for speaking ill of Moses... wasn't that paid for? When God took David's child because of his sin of adultery, wasn't that paid for?, etc.

God still punishes sin, but those punishments I just mentioned are not THE punishment for sin.  THE punishment for sin is eternal death.  Anything less than eternal death is not THE punishment for sin.  Because of the Cross every man does not have to experience eternal death when he sins, but it doesn't mean God won't still punish him for sin.  God might not send a person to hell for their sin, but He still hates sin(disobedience of His will). 

Truthnluv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, in each of these examples you give you could make a case that this was not punishment at all. It is discipline. Punishment is not for the good of the one punished. It is not designed to bring repentance or correct behavior. Discipline is done in the context of relationship (see Hebrews 12:6ff) Those whom God loves He disciplines. Punishment implies retribution