And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world (I John 2:2).
In our discussion of this passage from Holy Scripture, I was showing how the battle between the defenders of universal atonement and particular redemption is a battle that has gone on over the centuries. It was a battle that was fought at the Synod of Dordt as well as at the Westminster Assembly. Both bodies incorporated the doctrine of particular redemption in the creeds which they wrote.
Some, however, have appealed to the Canons of Dordt in support of the doctrine that the death of Christ, while efficient for the elect, was nevertheless, sufficient for all men. They quote Article 3 of the 2nd head of doctrine. It reads: "The death of the Son of God is the only and most perfect sacrifice and satisfaction for sin; and is of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world."
No one may, however, find in this article comfort in his support of a universal atonement. The fathers of Dordt in no way compromised their views here.
It must be remembered that the Arminians charged the Reformed with demeaning the atonement of the Son of God by limiting it to the elect only. The Arminians claimed that this doctrine of limited atonement (or particular redemption) diminished the significance of the fact that the eternal Son of God made atonement for sin.
The fathers are responding to this. Their response is this. If one looks at the atonement from the viewpoint of the One who performed it, that is, from the viewpoint that the eternal Son of God died on the crosss, then indeed "the death of the Son of God…is of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world." In other words, if God had one or two more elect for whom Christ died, He would not have had to suffer more. The eternal Son of God, who is infinite in power, made a sacrifice of infinite worth.
The fact of the matter is, however, according to these same fathers of Dordt, that Christ's sacrifice is only for the elect. Listen to them. "For this was the sovereign counsel, and must gracious will and purpose of God the Father, that the quickening and saving efficacy of the most precious death of his Son should extend to all the elect, for bestowing upon them alone the gift of justifying faith, thereby to bring them infallibly to salvation: that is, it was the will of God, that Christ by the blood of the cross, whereby he confirmed the new covenant, should effectually redeem out of every people, tribe, nation, and language, all those, and those only, who were from eternity chosen to salvation and given to him by the Father…."
This is a strong and emphatic statement concerning the extent of the atonement. It is stronger than the Westminster Confession in a way. The WC read: "The Lord Jesus by his perfect sacrifice of himself…hath…purchased…an everlasting inheritance…for all those whom the Father hath given unto him" (VIII,5). "Although the work of redemption was not actually wrought by Christ till after his incarnation, yet the virtue, efficacy, and benefits thereof were communicated unto the elect… (VIII,6).
The Canons are somewhat stronger on this point than the Westminster Confession because of the exclusionary clause found in the Canons, which is not found in the WC: "…He should effectually redeem…all those, and those only, who were from eternity chosen to salvation." The words, "and those only" are not found in the WC.
It may have been this omission that enabled some Amyrauldians, such as Richard Baxter, to sign the WC.
In any case, Dordt insists that the death of Christ was for the elect, and for them only. That allows for no possibility that Christ's death on the cross was for all men.
It is sometimes argued (and several books have been written on the subject) that Calvin never taught a limited atonement.
This is a remarkable slander of the great Reformer of Geneva. I quote from Calvin's commentary on the very passage we are discussing.
"Here the question may be raised, how have the sins of the whole world been expiated? I pass by the dotages of the fanatics, who under this pretence extend salvation to all the reprobate, and therefore to Satan himself. Such a monstrous thing deserves no refutation. They who seek to avoid this absurdity, have said that Christ suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect. This solution has commonly revealed in the schools. Though then I allow that what has been said is true, yet I deny that it is suitable to this passage; for the design of John was no other than to make this benefit common to the whole Church. Then under the wordall or whole, he does not include the reprobate, be designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world. For then is really made evident, as it is meet, the grace of Christ, when it is declared to be the only true salvation of the world."
This is Calvin. To teach that Christ's atonement is for all is "monstrous' and the "dotages of the fanatics."
We agree with Calvin. John, in his first epistle, 2:2, refers to the fact that the church for which Christ died is a church gathered from the whole world. It is a catholic church to show forth the riches of the manifold grace of God, a church purchased and saved through the blood of the cross.
This truth is a glorious truth.
Additional Info
- Volume: 8
- Issue: 10
Hanko, Herman
Prof. Herman Hanko (Wife: Wilma)
Ordained: October 1955
Pastorates: Hope, Walker, MI - 1955; Doon, IA - 1963; Professor to the Protestant Reformed Seminary - 1965
Emeritus: 2001
Website: www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?speakeronly=true&currsection=sermonsspeaker&keyword=Prof._Herman_HankoContact Details
-
Address725 Baldwin Dr. B-25
-
CityJenison
-
State or ProvinceMI
-
Zip Code49428
-
CountryUnited States
-
Telephone616-667-6033