This morning we continue with our examination of what is called the Doctrines of Grace. You’ll notice it is not “are the Doctrines of Grace” but “is the Doctrines of Grace.” This communicates though there is a plurality of Doctrines that plurality of Doctrines makes for one Doctrine of Grace. This goes to what we said last week, and that is the Doctrines of Grace rise and fall together. One simply cannot, without burdened with contradiction and weighted down with inconsistency hold to any one of these doctrines of Grace w/o hold to all of these Doctrines of Grace. One cannot w/o gross contradiction and stiff-necked inconsistency say of themselves, “I hold to three of the Doctrines of grace but not two others, or, I hold to four of the Doctrines of Grace but not one other.”
Now having said that, we should note again, that a high percentage of people do actually hold that very idea. A high percentage of clergy hold that very position. They hold some of the Doctrines of Grace and not others and then they have the moxie to tell me that my problem and fault is that Calvinists are using human logic. When I respond to that by asking if God is more pleased with the human illogicality and irrationality that is required for them to embrace contradiction I usually am met with the deer in the headlight stare.
With all the compassion and diplomat speak I can muster I have to warn people against the kind of Doublethink that is required to hold to some but not all of the Doctrines of Grace. Engaging in that kind of systematic contradictory thinking is not good for one’s mental health.
You will remember that this Double-think that must be engaged in order to be a 3 point, 4 point or 4.5 Calvinist is a concept teased out in Orwell’s novel, 1984. Double-think was the ability whereby a person is expected to simultaneously accept mutually contradictory ideas as true at the same time in contravention to the maxim that both a and non a cannot both be true at the time in the same sense.
Calvinists don’t do double-think. We don’t embrace the contradiction. We don’t talk much about paradoxes, antinomies, or enigmas. We see God’s Word as non-contradictory. We admit there are theological truths – aspects of Scripture — we can’t get to the bottom of but even then we refuse to list them as contradictions. We believe that 2nd person of the Trinity being the incarnated Logic forbids us from doing double-think. And further we are convinced that doing double-think is damaging to one’s soul since a double-minded man is unstable in all his ways.
So, we consider this morning the “L” in our TULIP acrostic. We have considered “Total Depravity,” and “Unconditional Election” in previous weeks. This week we look at Limited Atonement. This will take us two or three weeks to navigate.
First we will offer up some definitions and then we will go to the Scripture to see how the definition is drawn from the Word of God.
When we first consider just the idea of Atonement we note that Scripture teaches that Atonement is the state of being returned to being “at one” – reconciled – to God. Atonement presupposes the prior condition of hostility between God and man and man and God. Atonement is the legal means by which that hostility is overcome. As such we see that Atonement in Scripture denotes the end effect which flows for the death of Christ.
The Theologian Leon Morris said of Atonement
“it means a making of one, and points to a process of bringing those who are estranged into a unity… Its use in theology is to denote the work of Christ in dealing with the problem posed by the sin of man, and in bringing sinners into a right relation with God.”
Already, we are beginning to see something that I have mentioned in previous weeks but is really going to come to the fore when we deal with Atonement and that is the idea that Biblical Christianity is a faith that is juridical at its core. It is premised and based upon legal categories and cannot be understood apart from these legal categories that we now call “doctrines.”
You see this being expressed in this idea of Atonement. Man has ruined himself in sin. How shall fallen man be restored? Well, the answer to that is man must meet the legal requirement somehow which declares that the soul that sinneth shall surely die. Death is the legal judicial penalty for all sin and any sin. There it is… that legal penalty must be met. Atonement begins to tell us what the legal remedy is whereby fallen man can both meet the requirements of the legal penalty of sin (Death) by means of a legal process.
Atonement and the constellation or words surrounding Atonement
Reconcilliation Propitiation Expiation Ransom Redemption Sacrifice Substitution Justice Satisfaction Surety Forgiveness Salvation
Are each and all words that can only be understood in a Judicial legal context. This teaches us that before Christianity is about relationship it is about the Judicial legal grounds upon which that relationship is established. Too many Christians want the relationship apart from understanding God’s judicial work of Atonement.
So, already we see here that Atonement is a HUGE subject. We could easily spend 45 minutes every Lord’s Day exposing the meaning of the constellation of all the words that are implied in the idea of Atonement.
Now that we have limned out a beginning definition of Atonement we now go on to consider the textual evidence from which this is drawn. Interestingly enough we say right out of the gate that this is a case where the English word “Atonement’ doesn’t have a one for one correspondence etymologically with any particular Hebrew or Greek word. As such, no mere word study alone can determine the Biblical teaching concerning Atonement.
We see the Greek word Kattalege translated sometimes as Atonement in Romans 5:11
“We also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.”
Many of your translations will give you the word “reconciliation” where the KJV gives the word atonement, thus suggesting that there is in the idea of Atonement something of “reconciliation.”
If we back up though and consider conceptually the idea of Atonement from the OT we stumble upon the Hebrew word “Kipper” which also informs us regarding the idea of Atonement.
Exodus 30:10, Lev. 4:20
10 And Aaron shall make an atonement upon the horns of it once in a year with the blood of the sin offering of atonements: once in the year shall he make atonement upon it throughout your generations: it is most holy unto the Lord.
20 And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them.
The Hebrew word here translated “Atonement” means to cover, propitiate, to atone for sin. The concept here is describing the effect of the sacrifices at the consecration of the high priest and the altar and the annual sacrifices – especially as on the Day of Atonement.
Citing Morris again… “Kipper (atonement) carries with it the implication of a turning away of the divine wrath by an appropriate offering.”
Romans 5 taught us there was something about Atonement that included the idea of “Reconciliation.” Here we see in the word Kipper we see that there is something in the idea of Atonement that includes the idea to cover, propitiate, to atone for sin.
Now add to that, that Atonement in the NT is part of the Greek Hilaskomai word group which points to propitiation.
2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Some versions will have “sacrifice of atonement” instead of the word propitiation.
So, again we see the word “Atonement” is a river that has many etymological streams flowing into it. Atonement has to do with reconciliation, has to do with propitiation, has to do with covering, has to do with penalty paid. The NT writers use many modes of description for the work of Christ which we refer to as the Atonement.
We have seen enough so far, to be able to say that if the Cross is at the heart of the Christian faith then Atonement is at the heart of the Cross. There is no understanding of Christianity apart from an expansive understanding of the Cross and there is no understanding the Cross apart from an expansive understanding of atonement. When we gaze at the Cross, those with eyes to see are seeing God’s atonement – an atonement that includes reconciliation, propitiation, expiation, covering, substitution, penalty paid, Redemption, Ransom, and much more. And when we probe into Atonement we begin to get lost in wonder, love and praise. When we probe into the Atonement we begin to learn that God did it all. Via the provided for Atonement God rescued fallen sinners. Via the provided Atonement Christ satisfied the legal debt that was absolutely required to be paid.
Let us talk about the Atonement. We already noted that in the Hebrew Word Kipper there is the idea of propitiation.
Hebrews 4:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.
The sacrifices propitiated God… which is to say Atonement includes the idea of the Atonement sacrifice turning away the just wrath of God against sinners for having violated His Law.
There is that legal process idea again. A law was broken. The Lawgiver is justly wrathful against His law being broken. A price must be paid to satisfy law and lawgiver. That price paid is the Atonement because without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 9:22). Christ’s Atonement is a legal transaction wherein by His Cross Work He satisfies our legal debt owed to God and in satisfying that legal sin debt God is propitiated …. His wrath is turned away and so we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 5:1).
Note the magnificence in all this. In the Atonement God provides Himself in the 2nd person of the Trinity – the Incarnate Christ – and then lays upon Himself the penalty of our and my sin so that His just character might not be questioned and so He may express the infinite supply of His mercy to people such as us. God does it all. Does all the penalty bearing. Does all the dying. Does all the saving. God does it all. Oh Saints how can we not be lost in eternal gratitude. How can we not therefore as a result of all this mercy not be a people who are zealous for good works? How can we not therefore as a result of all this grace not be a people who are angered when the name and Character of our Great God is diminished and set at naught? How can we not therefore contend at every turn for the crown rights of our benevolent Lord Jesus Christ?
To not rise up to contend for His cause is an insult to His great favor and mercy found in the Atonement.
We have been Atoned for and so are clear of sin, guilt and misery that characterizes uniformly those outside of Christ. We are no longer twisted by the weight of guilt nor can we be guilt manipulated because we have been atoned for. The guilt has been borne in our stead. Because we are atoned for we can be the most clear thinking on two legs because the damaging work of guilt can no longer twist our minds.
Scripture list
Now this is a very brief idea of Atonement. A Pastor could only hope that it whets your appetite to pursue it more. Let me say here that we and our children as Christians should have a basic handle on this. If someone asks you “what is Atonement” we ought to be able to answer that in some simple way such as,
“Atonement refers to the work of Christ on the cross where He met God’s just and legal demands by paying for the penalty of sin by spilling His blood in sacrifice thereby providing reconciliation by ending the previous sin wrought hostility that existed between God and man and man and God by means of propitiation.”
Now… all that was a brief tutorial on Atonement. Now, let’s limn out where we are going next week when we add the word “Limited” to the word “Atonement.”
When we add the word “Limited” to the word “Atonement” we are saying that the Atonement is not universal… it was never intended for all men. The Atonement has been limited by God to those He marked out from eternity past as unconditionally elect. It is the unconditionally elect alone who Christ atoned for.
Now, this idea … this “L” in our TULIP Acrostic is reputed to be the Doctrine of Grace that most people stumble over. If people are to give up any petal of TULIP it is usually the “L.” Most commonly when someone says that they are a “Four point Calvinist” it is the “L” that they have thrown overboard. People are troubled by Limited Atonement.
But let’s pause here to say a couple things.
First, every Christian you meet, unless they are a Universalist and believe all people, no matter what, go to heaven believes in Limited Atonement. The person who denies the “L” in “Limited Atonement” believes in Limited Atonement.
Why do I say that? Because, as I said, unless someone is a Universalist all Christians recognize that the Atonement has been limited by somebody or something. If there are people in Hell, then the Atonement was limited. It didn’t save everybody.
So… what is the problem?
Here is the problem. In our “L” in Limited Atonement we teach that God is the one doing the limiting. He determined to choose the Elect. In the Limited Atonement of those who don’t like our Limited Atonement it is fallen man who determines the limiting of Atonement. So, the problem with Limited Atonement is that we are all good with God limiting Atonement and our opposition insists that man gets to limit atonement.
BUT wait … you say. (And rightly so)
If man is really Totally depraved like our “T” teaches us then man can’t do anything but decide to be the one who limits the atonement if you deny or “L.” So, if you combine the “T” of TULIP and deny the “L” of TULIP so that man is the one who limits the atonement then the result is a reverse universalism wherein all people spend eternity in Hell.
