The unpardonable sin is the extreme sin Jesus warns against in Matthew 12, Mark 3, and Luke 12, of blaspheming the Holy Spirit.
We might also ask whether Christ died for those who had been "judicially hardened" by God so that they could not be converted. (Matt. 13: 15) Or, we might ask whether Christ died for those who had committed the sin unto death. (1 John 5:16–17) We might also ask whether Christ died for Judas, who hanged himself before Christ died.
As a believer in limited atonement I affirm that Christ did not die for such people. But, a believer in unlimited atonement would have to affirm that Christ died for those for whom it was not possible for them to be saved.
Think on these things.
8 comments:
I will take a crack at this, however be aware that not everything I say here is necessarily my belief. These are just thoughts on many different views I have encountered thru the years, some of which I agree, and some which I do not.
First, those who believe in unlimited atonement, generally believe that while Christ did die for all men, the bigger issue is whether or not He CONQUERED the sin condition. Below are some things the general atonement believers may ask.
1.Did Satan win a partial victory because Christ "failed" to conquer ALL sin?
2.Did Christ defeat SIN or SINS or both? (the singular being the sin condition)If He only defeated "sins" plural of the elect only, then there must be some sins which have never been defeated. So If Christ died for one murderer, but not another, then could it not be said that that he failed to deal with the condition itself? or if the price was the same no matter how many murderers there are, then what did He see in the elect when He chose them, that He did not see in the non elect?
3.If the atonement is limited, is it "divided" by the number of those that are elect? Does each elect person get so many drops of blood applied until there is none left? Or does each get all the blood and if so, isnt the cost to save one sinner the same as it is to save all? Christ only died once to save all the elect, so doesnt that mean His death is enough for all? If a vaccine can cure everyone, yet some refuse it, can you still say some of the vaccine was wasted because not all received it? For a vaccine to be true, it must have the ability to be replicated perpetually as needed, otherwise it would have to be called "vaccines" plural.
4.A sovereign God must have a reason for everything He does. So what is the reason He chose the ones He did? If He did not choose according to any merit in the creature (works)then on what did He base His choice? Or could His choosing be a GROUP and not individuals since the scriptures say Christ died for the CHURCH (Ephesians 5:25)meaning the number in that group can be infinite, while the group itself remains only one. The "one lost sheep" may be the bride of Christ, only one bride, as He is not a polygamist, but clearly is a group, so whetehr the atonement is limited or unlimited,He still gets His bride. Could it be that in His foreknowledge of who WOULD believe, that the number of the elect has been fixed accordingly, much like the ark of Noah was built to only hold his family and the animals, yet 2 Peter 2:5 calls him a "preacher of righteousness". God only "intended" to save Noah and his family, but was God's intention because of Noah's self righteousness, or because Noah was accounted as righteous because he believed God? and how would we be sure it was for this reason unless he was a preacher as 2 Peter states, so he mustve preached to all those around him else who did he preach to?
5. Many Calvinists also reject limited atonement, saying that the atonement is sufficient for all, but efficient only for the elect. If that is true, doesnt it prove that the cost to save one sinner, is the same it would cost to save all sinners? General atonement believers would whole heartedly agree that the atonement is sufficient for all, but efficient only for the elect. Could this have been a
"uniting" statement among those who were United Baptists?
Just some thoughts
Good points to consider.
I certainly unite in saying Christ's atonement is sufficient for all and efficient for the elect.
I see sheep, believer, and elect as denoting the same group. The question is - did God choose me because I chose him, or did I choose him because he first chose me?
Blessings in Christ,
Stephen
Well even advocates of general atonement can say "sufficient for all, but efficient only for the elect (those who believe). However there are some Calvinists who would call you a 4 pointer Bro. Stephen if you believe the atonement is "sufficient for all". As for asking did Christ die for those you mentioned above, let me just use one of your examples. Let's look at Judas. The Scriptures make clear that we are all enemies of God James 4:4 says "Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God." Judas definitely was a "friend of the world". However Jesus called Judas "friend" in Matt 26:50, even in the midst of His being betrayed. Why would Jesus do this? For those who believe in a general atonement, it is because God (Jesus) loved Judas the same as he loved us. Jesus would break the barrier wall that exists between "enemies" and desires to be our "friend" even while we are yet in our sin. In our view, Judas could have been saved even tho he betrayed the Son of God. Haven't we all betrayed Him, even at times after we are saved? God's foreknowledge and using that foreknowledge to accomplish His will does not equate to manipulation of a persons actions, they alone are responsible for those actions. The Scriptures do say that Judas "was doomed to destruction" which some believe proves he went to hell, however some believe "destruction" indicates his suicide. (I believe the former). Yet Judas did "repent", understood the magnitude of his sin, and even tried to make some type of restitution by returning the 30 pieces of silver. It was too late for Judas tho, because he had committed the unpardonable sin...that of rejecting the Christ and believing Him for eternal life. This IS blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. The more we reject Jesus by the convicting of the Holy Ghost, the more the Spirit withdraws from us until He bothers us no more. When God stops convicting us, it is too late. There is some debate about the "when" nevertheless it is true. Anyone who goes to hell does so by committing the unpardonable sin, which is the rejection of God and His offer of mercy.
As for did you choose God because He chose you, or did God choose you because you chose Him, we can only ask this question. Why did God choose you and pass over another? If you believe election is singular rather than corporate, you cannot honestly answer this question. You simply cannot know why He chose you, because you have no more merit than anyone else. For those who advocate general atonement and corporate election (chosen "in Christ" before the foundation of the world), then the answer is that He chose the church, the body of Christ, the bride of Christ, a group that has always been chosen before the foundation of the world, made up of individuals who freely choose Him, who then become predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son of God.
Regardless of any views out there, it is IMPERATIVE that we MUST come while the Spirit woos us. Do NOT wait! Turn to the Lord while He can still be found! Call on Him while He is still near! (Isaiah 55:6)
Dear brother Kenny:
Of course I don't agree with some things you say. My views on definite or limited atonement are spelled out in my series on that in The Baptist Gadfly. The first entry can be read at
http://baptistgadfly.blogspot.com/2012/09/definite-atonement-i.html
Also, I do not believe the bible teaches that God chose me as a result of my choosing him. John says "we love him because he first loved us" (I John 4: 19) and we may equally say "we choose him because he first chose us." We choose to love God because he first chose to love us. God knew me (foreknew) me before I knew him.
About free will, I will be writing some on that in the near future. But, you speak of Christ "conquering" our sin condition. Well, I believe God conquers the will when he saves a sinner. See my posting
https://old-baptist-test.blogspot.com/2020/02/can-god-subdue-will.html
You also speak of God's work of convicting of sin. Does he do this apart from the consent of the convicted? Does he irresistibly and effectually convict?
You speak of God "wooing." Does God fail in this? Can he not successfully woo any he wants to woo? Is wooing a violation of free will? Is it manipulation (your word)?
God not only invites and woos sinners to love him, yet he also commands them to do so with threat of eternal damnation if they don't love him. So, yes, he woos, but he does so with force acting upon the will.
Yes, nothing in us is the reason why God chose us. The reason is in God. Why did he choose only Naaman to be healed? Was it because he was the best Syrian?
If there is something is us that moves God to choose us, then it is based upon something different in us. But, Paul says that our differences are due to God's giving. (I Cor. 4: 7) If God chose us because he made us different, and he made us different by his choice, then we are going in circles.
Election and limited atonement keeps no one out of salvation who truly seeks and desires it.
Blessings,
Stephen
Bro. Stephen,
1. I agree, God doesnt choose us because we chose Him. It's because God convicted me of sin before I knew Him. He was "choosing" me before I came to Him, and I believe that since He exists outside of time, His choosing me (by conviction)it can rightly be said He chose me in eternity past. I know that may sound strange but I believe it. The difference is, Christ was also slain before the foundation of the world, but in "time" it is man that crucified Him. So can we say man had no part in His crucifixion because He had already been slain before the world began? I say no. Those men willingly chose to crucify Him.
2.When it comes to conviction, yes He does it apart from the consent of the convicted. Does any man stand in a court room before a judge give his consent? No. The preaching of the gospel puts a man under conviction before he realizes what is happening. However in the general atonement view, we can "fess up" and admit our guilt, or continue to deny it. This part is our choice ("IF we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive)
3."Wooing" is not a violation of our will. However, I suppose it could be said that it is a "manipulation" in the sense that a man "manipulates" his beloved, chases her impresses her, etc. He tries to show her his goodness, sweetness, giving, providing etc. God tells us what He can and will do for us. But in the end, (I believe) it is our choice. The wedding that is to come between Christ and His church will not be a "shotgun" wedding where one participant is forced or unwilling. If we cannot freely choose Him, can it rightly be called love? I believe God created us, knowing we would fall, but also knowing some would would willingly respond to His love. Matthew 5:46 says if we only love those who love us, what reward is there in that? That is why I believe He loves all persons with the same love, but when His love is reciprocated therein lies His "reward". What bridegroom doesnt beam with joy and tears knowing that the one he chose also chose him over any other?
(had to divide this in 2 parts sorry part 2 will follow this
4.I dont necessarily see God "threatening" us with damnation as much as "warning" us of it. He does not delight in the destruction of sinners. "Say to them, 'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways!(Ezek 33:11)
5.As for why God healed Naaman, we know that God loves the poor and the humble, but Naaman was rich and important. We know that God loves the meek, but Naaman was proud, arrogant, and powerful. We know that God loves his covenant people Israel, but Naaman was a Syrian and an enemy of Israel. So why did God heal this man? I think it was to teach us something important about God’s grace, namely, that it’s available for everybody, even those we might think don’t deserve it. Also, it was conditional upon Naaman doing as Elisha said. Naaman thought the waters of
Syria were better than the river Jordan, but he eventually did as Elisha said and was healed. Is this not a perfect picture of Jesus not being considered the "better water" by the Jews? Is it not also a picture that while the Jews were His covenant people, that He would also cleanse anyone else who believed? Is it not a perfect picture of one from His covenant people, the slave girl,telling Naaman where to find cleansing, and how we are His new Covenant people who, even tho we may be lowly in position in this life, that we alone have the words of life give to us by the Master whereby men can be saved?
6.You said "Yes, nothing in us is the reason why God chose us. The reason is in God." I TOTALLY AGREE! We are chosen "IN CHRIST" (in God) before the foundation of the world. If we will only believe, we can be "in Christ".
7.You even as a Calvinist, believe faith comes before regeneration. Many Calvinists would say that you are requiring a "condition" for salvation. You also told me that would would say what the Scriptures say, even if it seems to contradict your Calvinism. You have NO idea how much respect I have for you because you said that. So because you believe the atonement is "sufficient for all" and that "faith precedes regeneration", many Calvinists would decry you as a mere 3 pointer. I dont keep up with "points"...I believe you are a Calvinist in your head, but a Christian in your heart, and I love you every bit for it
Dear Brother Kenny:
I may be a semi Calvinist or semi Arminian depending upon how we define the terms. On total depravity I am a Calvinist and Classical Arminian. Both of these groups held to total depravity. The latter believed that prevenient grace overcame the obstacle of depravity, while many (not all) Calvinists took the view that regeneration overcomes depravity and makes faith possible. I am a Calvinist who believes in prevenient grace, although I believe it in somewhat different ways than do Classical Arminians.
On the 3rd point (limited atonement) I am similar to many Calvinists, such as Calvin himself, who saw how the atonement was both limited and unlimited. I believe Christ died only for the elect (believers) as a substitute for their sins. But, I believe his atonement also did things for all men, elect or non elect, such as giving of common grace. I also believe that Christ purchased all men, but purchased the elect for a different end.
Thanks for your comments. We can choose to love and tolerate each other. It is called forbearance and longsuffering. When done with mutual love and respect, it is well pleasing to the Lord.
Yes, I am not tied to a creed. I study for myself, listen to all points of view, and make my choice, hopefully always in prayer and the fear of God. I am willing to change my mind if shown my error. After fifty years of bible study, I still have many things I don't have a firm opinion upon.
But, I am a predestinarian. I believe God is in control of all things and works all things after the counsel of his own will. I believe God turns the hearts of men, including their wills, in whatever direction he wants. If he could not control the wills of his creatures, then how could he control the world?
Blessings in Jesus' name.
Stephen
I agree with much of what you say Bro Stephen. I also am "predestinarian" in many ways. I believe God wins, the Church wins, and love wins. These things God has promised and He will bring them to complete fruition.The biggest difference is that I believe God is not limited to mans choice in order to accomplish them, and that we have the ability to choose Him or not, all the while, He works all things for good to those who believe. He commands me to love all persons, even those who are my enemies. I must assume that since He commanded it, and desires that I be like Him, He must also love His enemies. I pray for the salvation of all and desire all persons to know and love the Savior. Nevertheless, He will be glorified whether I choose Him or not. He is so beautiful I dont see how any could "resist", but for me thats the beauty of love. He desires love given freely as much as we do. I have "chosen" you as my friend, and I have "chosen" to be a friend to you. My choosing does not negate your will or mine, it merely exposes it. I love you my dear friend, and know the difficult road you have traveled in coming to truth, and the desire to see your hardshell brethren see it as well. Just keep going, wherever the truth leads, whatever the cost. Baptists are non creedal for that reason. We are not bound by creeds and confessions can be changed at will. For some this is a weakness, but for us it is a strength. We must rely on the Scriptures at the end of the day.
Blessings my friend. The truth has set you FREE! Use that freedom as He leads. Kenny
Post a Comment