Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The "for each and every person" view of the atonement is a potential view of atonement, not an actually accomplished atonement. In other words, this is universal redemption or general atonement in that Christ’s redeeming work made it possible for everyone to be saved but did not actually secure the salvation of anyone. Further, per this view although Christ died for all men and for every man, only those who believe on Him are saved. Christ's death enabled God to pardon sinners on the condition that they believe, but it did not actually put away anyone’s sins. Christ’s redemption becomes effective only if man chooses to accept it.
This is essentially Arminianism, Romanism, and open theism in that salvation is accomplished through the combined efforts of God (who takes the initiative) and man (who must respond—man’s response being the determining factor. Herein God has provided salvation for everyone, but His provision becomes effective only for those who, of their own free will, choose to cooperate with Him and accept His offer of grace. At the crucial point, man’s will plays a decisive role; thus man, not God, determines who will be recipients of the gift of salvation.
It would seem to be very difficult, if not impossible, to be trusting in Jesus Christ alone if one holds to conditional election on the ground of foreseen faith, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace. Those who hold to these odd doctrines, if they are being consistent, must believe that their salvation depends, in part, on their own merit. If a person holds, for example, that God elected him because God foresaw that he would have faith, then why does he have faith, while someone else does not? In effect, don’t you really believe that your faith is meritorious—you merited salvation by your faith, while your neighbor did not have faith, and thus did not merit salvation? If you hold this consistently you are not trusting on the merit of Christ alone but upon your own merit, and you are probably in peril.
So all would likely say people end up in eternity where they are (heaven or hell) due to the difference to how God acts in our lives, or in how we act in ourselves. And would not the second option, "how we act in ourselves," relieve God of the oft-made charge of treating people differently? Accordingly, no one in Hell would then complain about being there.
Given the above, I think the first option—the difference to how God (not man) acts in our lives—has more Scriptural warrant. It means that some folks will actually wind up in Heaven since no lost person, given the state of their sin, would actually obey the Gospel call to repentance (Jer. 17:9; Mark 7:21-23; John 3:19; Rom. 3:10-12; Rom. 5:6; Eph. 2:1; Eph. 2:3; 1 Cor. 2:14; Rom. 6:16-20).
Also, if God is really required to treat all people the same, why does our Lord not pray for all people the same way in John 17:9: “I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours” ? And does not God confidently affirm something very different (Romans 9:15) when it comes to treating each and every person the same?
Therefore, from our Lord's own declaration of finishing what He was sent to actually accomplish (John 17), in addition to putting away the sins of His people, Christ’s redemption secured everything necessary for their salvation— including faith as the fruit of their rebirth—infallibly applied by the Spirit, that unites them to Him and keeps them forever.
Lastly, if we are to accept the view that Our Lord atoned for all sins, for what exactly are the sinners in hell suffering?
I think it is clear from Scripture that God owes man nothing save His justice for man's rebellion. What God chooses to give, outside of His retributive justice, is all of grace (Eph. 2:8-9). This means that God treats His chosen ones one way, and those not chosen another--all to everlasting praise of His glory.
AMR
This is essentially Arminianism, Romanism, and open theism in that salvation is accomplished through the combined efforts of God (who takes the initiative) and man (who must respond—man’s response being the determining factor. Herein God has provided salvation for everyone, but His provision becomes effective only for those who, of their own free will, choose to cooperate with Him and accept His offer of grace. At the crucial point, man’s will plays a decisive role; thus man, not God, determines who will be recipients of the gift of salvation.
It would seem to be very difficult, if not impossible, to be trusting in Jesus Christ alone if one holds to conditional election on the ground of foreseen faith, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace. Those who hold to these odd doctrines, if they are being consistent, must believe that their salvation depends, in part, on their own merit. If a person holds, for example, that God elected him because God foresaw that he would have faith, then why does he have faith, while someone else does not? In effect, don’t you really believe that your faith is meritorious—you merited salvation by your faith, while your neighbor did not have faith, and thus did not merit salvation? If you hold this consistently you are not trusting on the merit of Christ alone but upon your own merit, and you are probably in peril.
So all would likely say people end up in eternity where they are (heaven or hell) due to the difference to how God acts in our lives, or in how we act in ourselves. And would not the second option, "how we act in ourselves," relieve God of the oft-made charge of treating people differently? Accordingly, no one in Hell would then complain about being there.
Given the above, I think the first option—the difference to how God (not man) acts in our lives—has more Scriptural warrant. It means that some folks will actually wind up in Heaven since no lost person, given the state of their sin, would actually obey the Gospel call to repentance (Jer. 17:9; Mark 7:21-23; John 3:19; Rom. 3:10-12; Rom. 5:6; Eph. 2:1; Eph. 2:3; 1 Cor. 2:14; Rom. 6:16-20).
Also, if God is really required to treat all people the same, why does our Lord not pray for all people the same way in John 17:9: “I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours” ? And does not God confidently affirm something very different (Romans 9:15) when it comes to treating each and every person the same?
Therefore, from our Lord's own declaration of finishing what He was sent to actually accomplish (John 17), in addition to putting away the sins of His people, Christ’s redemption secured everything necessary for their salvation— including faith as the fruit of their rebirth—infallibly applied by the Spirit, that unites them to Him and keeps them forever.
Lastly, if we are to accept the view that Our Lord atoned for all sins, for what exactly are the sinners in hell suffering?
I think it is clear from Scripture that God owes man nothing save His justice for man's rebellion. What God chooses to give, outside of His retributive justice, is all of grace (Eph. 2:8-9). This means that God treats His chosen ones one way, and those not chosen another--all to everlasting praise of His glory.
AMR