From: Suzianty Herawati
The Reformed Faith and Arminianism:
Part II
John Murray
Limited Atonement
The second article of the Arminian Remonstrance of 1610 concerned the question
of the extent of the atonement. It reads as follows: "Article II. That,
agreeably thereto, Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world, died for all men and
for every man, so that he has obtained for them all, by his death on the cross,
redemption and the forgiveness of sins; yet that no one actually enjoys this
forgiveness of sins except the believer, according to the word of the Gospel of
John 3:16. . . . . And in the First Epistle of John 2:2 . . ." This is an
emphatic statement of what is known as the doctrine of universal atonement, and
is in its essence that Christ died for all men alike and procured for them
equally and without distinction redemption and forgiveness of sins. The
atonement as such, it says in effect, has as its intention the provision of
salvation for all, the making of the salvation of all men possible, the placing
of all men and every man in a salvable state or condition.
In opposition to this the Reformed Faith affirms the doctrine of what is known
as limited atonement. What does it mean? Perhaps the best answer that can be
given to this question is to set forth the teaching of the Westminster
Confession of Faith, chapter VIII, section V.
Redemption Purchased for the Elect
"The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and
sacrifice of himself, which he through the eternal Spirit once offered up unto
God, hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father; and purchased not only
reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for
all those whom the Father hath given unto him." This definitely states that
reconciliation and an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven is
purchased for all those given to the Son by the Father. Who are they? In
section 1 of this same chapter we are told that they are the people given to
Christ from all eternity to be His seed and "to be by him in time redeemed,
called, justified, sanctified, and glorified." The people given to Christ are
surely the same as the people chosen in Christ ? the form of expression used in
chapter III, section v ? and they are simply those of mankind predestinated
unto life, namely, the elect. With respect to them the Confession continues:
"As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he, by the eternal and
most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore
they who are elected being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ; are
effectually called unto faith in Christ by his Spirit working in due season;
are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto
salvation." (III.vi.) It is for the elect, therefore, for the predestinated to
life, for those given to Christ by the Father, for those chosen in Christ unto
everlasting glory, that reconciliation and an eternal inheritance in the
kingdom of heaven is purchased. It is they who are redeemed by Christ. Thus
teaches the Confession, and so the difference has already become apparent.
Purchase and Application Co-extensive
"To all those for whom Christ hath purchased
redemption, he doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same."
(VIII.viii.) The import of this cannot be controverted. It is that the extent
of the purchase of redemption is exactly the same as the extent of actual
salvation. If Christ purchased redemption for all, then all will have that
applied and communicated to them. If only a certain number of the human race
are ultimately saved, then only for that number did Christ purchase redemption.
So explicit is the above statement that it needs no confirmation. But in order
to show that this is not a random statement but a determining principle of the
Confessional teaching it can be shown by an entirely distinct line of argument.
"Christ by his obedience and death did fully discharge the debt of all those
that are thus justified, and did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to
his Father's justice in their behalf." (XI.iii.) Those for whom Christ
discharged the debt and made satisfaction to justice are then the justified.
But all who are justified are also effectually called. "Those whom God
effectually calleth, he also freely justifieth." (XI.i.) And effectual calling
expounded in chapter X refers us back to predestination. "All those whom God
hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed
and accepted time, effectually to call, by his word and Spirit, out of that
state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by
Jesus Christ." (X.i.) And again: "God did from all eternity decree to justify
all the elect; and Christ did, in the fullness of time, die for their sins, and
rise again for their justification." (XI.iv.) The upshot is plain ?
predestination to life, redemption, effectually calling, and justification have
identical extent; they have in their embrace exactly the same persons.
The Exclusiveness of Redemption
That the non-elect, those who do not become the
actual partakers of salvation and are therefore finally lost, are not included
within the scope of the redemption purchased by Christ, we may and must even
from that which we have already quoted infer to be the teaching of the
Confession. But it is interesting to observe that not only does the Confession
imply this; it also expressly states it. "Neither are any other redeemed by
Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the
elect only." (III.vi.) The Confession is using the phrases "redeemed by Christ"
and "purchased redemption" synonymously. Here it is said that redemption by
Christ or the purchase of redemption is for those who as a matter of fact are
saved and for those only. It is exclusive of those who are not called,
justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved. Redemption is defined not only
extensively but exclusively. If we may recapitulate then, the
teaching of the Confession can be summed up in these three propositions. (1)
Redemption is purchased for the elect. (2) Redemption is applied to all for
whom it is purchased. (3) Redemption is not purchased for those who finally
perish, for the non-elect.
Atonement is defined therefore in the Confession in terms of sacrifice,
reconciliation, redemption, satisfaction to divine justice, discharge of debt,
and states clearly that atonement thus defined is for those whom God hath
predestinated to life, namely the elect. They are saved because Christ by his
redemptive work secured their salvation. The finally lost are not within the
embrace of that salvation secured, and therefore they are not within the
embrace of that salvation secured, and therefore they are not within the
embrace of that which secures it, namely the redemption wrought by Christ. It
is just here that the difference between Arminianism and Calvinism may be most
plainly stated. Did Christ die and offer Himself a sacrifice to God to make the
salvation of all men possible, or did He offer Himself a sacrifice to God to
secure infallibly the salvation of His people? Arminians profess the former and
deny the latter; our Standards in accordance, as we believe, with Holy
Scripture teach the latter.
Objections Answered
The term "limited" atonement has given
much offense. It may not indeed be the most fortunate terminology. It is
capable of misunderstanding and misrepresentation. Some for this reason may
prefer the terms "definite" or "particular" atonement. But what we are
particularly insistent upon defending is that which the term historically used
connotes, and so if the disuse of the term "limited" is calculated to create
the impression that we have renounced the doctrine of which the term is the
symbol, if in other words the disuse is calculated to placate the enemies of
our Reformed Faith, then we must resolutely refuse to refrain from its use. The
atonement is limited, because in its precise intention and meaning and effect
it is for those and for those only who are destined in the determinate purpose
of God to eternal salvation. We may well bless God that this is not a meager
company, but a multitude whom no man can number out of every nation and kindred
and people and tongue.
Let it not be thought that the Arminian by his doctrine escapes limited
atonement. The truth is that he professes a despicable doctrine of limited
atonement. He professes an atonement that is tragically limited in its efficacy
and power, an atonement that does not secure the salvation of any. He indeed
eliminates from the atonement that which makes it supremely precious to the
Christian heart. In B. B. Warfield's words, "the substance of the atonement is
evaporated, that it may be given a universal reference." (The Plan of
Salvation, p. 122.) What we mean is, that unless we resort to the position of
universal restoration for all mankind ? a position against which the witness of
Scripture is decisive ? an interpretation of the atonement in universal terms
must nullify its properly substitutive and redemptive character. We must take
our choice between a limited extent and a limited efficacy, or rather between a
limited atonement and an atonement without efficacy. It either infallibly saves
the elect or it actually saves none.
It is sometimes objected that the doctrine of limited atonement makes the
preaching of a full and free salvation impossible. This is wholly untrue. The
salvation accomplished by the death of Christ is infinitely sufficient and
universally suitable, and it may be said that its infinite sufficiency and
perfect suitability grounds a bona fide offer of salvation to all without
distinction. The doctrine of limited atonement any more than the doctrine of
sovereign election does not raise a fence around the offer of the gospel. The
overture of the gospel offering peace and salvation through Jesus Christ is to
all without distinction, though it is truly from the heart of sovereign
election and limited atonement that this stream of grace universally proffered
flows. If we may change the figure, it is upon the crest of the wave of divine
sovereignty and of limited atonement that the full and free offer of the gospel
breaks upon our shores. The offer of salvation to all is bona fide. All that is
proclaimed is absolutely true. Every sinner believing will infallibly be saved,
for the veracity and purpose of God cannot be violated.
The criticism that the doctrine of limited atonement prevents the free offer of
the gospel rests upon a profound misapprehension as to what the warrant for
preaching the gospel and even of the primary act of faith itself really is.
This warrant is not that Christ died for all men but the universal invitation,
demand and promise of the gospel united with the perfect sufficiency and
suitability of Christ as Savior and Redeemer. What the ambassador of the gospel
demands in Christ's name is that the lost and helpless sinner commit himself to
that all-sufficient Savior with the plea that in thus receiving and resting
upon Christ alone for salvation he will certainly be saved. And what the lost
sinner does on the basis of the warrant of faith is to commit himself to that
Savior with the assurance that as he thus trusts he will be saved. What he
believes, then, in the first instance is not that he has been saved, but that
believing in Christ salvation becomes his. The conviction that Christ died for
him, or in other words, that he is an object of God's redeeming love in Christ,
is not the primary act of faith. It is often in the consciousness of the
believer so closely bound up with the primary act of faith that he may not be
able to be conscious of the logical and psychological distinction. But
nevertheless the primary act of faith is self-committal to the all-sufficient
and suitable Savior, and the only warrant for that trust is the indiscriminate,
full and free offer of grace and salvation in Christ Jesus.
Author
Professor John Murray was born
in Scotland and was at the time of this writing a British subject. He was a
graduate of the University of Glasgow (1923) and of Princeton Theological
Seminary (1927), and he studied at the University of Edinburgh during 1928 and
1929.
In 1929-1930 he served on the faculty of the Princeton Theological
Seminary. After that he taught at the Westminster Theological Seminary in
Philadelphia where he served as Professor of Systematic Theology.
He was a frequent contributor to theological journals and is the author of
Christian Baptism (1952), Divorce (1953), Redemption Accomplished and Applied
(1955), Principles of Conduct (1957, The Imputation of Adam's Sin (1960),
Calvin on the Scriptures and Divine Sovereignty (1960), The Epistle to the
Romans, Vol I, Chapters I-VIII (1960) and The Atonement (1976).
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mailing List Jesus-Net Ministry Indonesia - JNM -
Daftar : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Keluar : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posting: [email protected]
Bantuan Moderator : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jesus-net/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
