Mark

Cheryl,

First I will respond to some of your comments regarding the nature of the atonement and after that I will move on to your last two lots of exegetical points.

“You keep saying that only a specific group of people can be given life and have their sins atoned. Where is your proof of this?”

Let me first give a definition of what I understand the atonement to be…

“The atonement is the work of God in Christ on the cross whereby he canceled the debt of our sin, appeased his holy wrath against us, and won for us all the benefits of salvation. The death of Christ was necessary because God would not show a just regard for his glory if he swept sins under the rug with no recompense.”

It is important to note that the atonement is the ‘canceling’ of our debt. That is, Jesus took our sin and the punishment for our sin onto his shoulders. Now if Jesus atoned in exactly the same way for every person, how is it that they are sent to hell- are not their sins ‘atoned’ for? Perhaps Cheryl, you believe that the sin of ‘unbelief’ or ‘rejection’ of the message of salvation was not atoned for. If that is what you believe then that worries me, because then you are saying the atonement was only ‘partial’- it did not atone for all sin. I can not accept that Jesus took the sin for every single person, yet people still go to hell- that is an oxymoron, it’s not an atonement at all.

Now some passages regarding the ‘limited’ nature of the atonement.

Joh 10:15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep.
Joh 10:16 And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd.

Now you object Cheryl because here Jesus does not say ‘only’. That is true- but look at verse 16. His sheep are from other ‘folds’ and he must bring them also. This is evidently how we should understand the term ‘world’- people from every tribe, language, nation. Universal language needs to be understood against the backdrop of the first century when the Jews were astonished that salvation was given also to the gentiles.

Joh 17:19 And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth.
Joh 17:20 “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word,

Jesus ‘consecration’ is his atonement. It is for his disciples and for those who ‘believe’ through the disciples teaching (Christians). This is in the midst of Jesus prayer where he specifically says he is not praying for the ‘world’ (non-believers) in the context.

Joh 11:51 He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation,
Joh 11:52 and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.

Again we see here more clearly how we should understand universal language. Jesus not only died for the jews but also the ‘children’ from abroad (the world)

Revelation 5:9, “Worthy art Thou to take the scroll and to open its seals, for Thou wast slain and by Thy blood didst ransom men for God from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.”

Same again. Note it does not say every single man in the world. It is limited

John 11:51-52, “He prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.”

1 John 2:2, “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.”
Note the parellel between John 11 and 1 John 2:2(often used against limited atonement). It’s clear John is using universal language to mean people scattered abroad (from all tribes, toungues etc). Also remember that ‘propitiated’ sins cannot be punished. So if the propititation is every single person then every single person is excluded from punishment= universalism.

More…

Mar 10:45 For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

‘Many’ not all. And again

Mat 26:28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

Hebrews 9:28, “So Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.”

More…

Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,
Eph 5:26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
Eph 5:27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.

The people who benefit from the atonement are the church…not all men. Christ gave himself up for ‘her’.

Titus 2:14 “He gave himself for us to redeem us from all iniquity and to purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds.”

Christ redeems ‘us’ the church, not all men.

Finally
Rom 8:32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?

See the link between the atonement and God giving us all things. If the atonement is for all men, then the promise of this verse is destroyed.

To conclude Jesus only ‘atoned’ for God’s children- the elect. Redemption is preached to all, but the actual nature and effect of the atonement belongs to those for whom Jesus actually atoned- the elect. If the atonement was universal then we must accept a doctrine of universalism which I am not willing to do. You cannot say that Jesus bore the sins of all men and then say that people are still punished for their sins because of rejection of the gospel. If this is true, then Jesus never actually atoned their sins anyway. Cheryl you must have a very different definiton of what ‘atonement’ actually means. It cannot mean ‘full forgiveness of sins’ because the wrath of God fell on Jesus.