Did Christ Die for Everyone?

The extent of Christ’s atonement has been debated so much that I felt compelled to weigh in on the issue today.

To start with, let me say that my theology has some loose ends in it. For example, I have no doubt that the free will of man and the sovereignty of God have a place of common ground even if that place exists outside of the limited understanding of my finite brain. A toddler may not understand what electricity is or how it works, but he can know that if you flip the switch, the lights come on. In a similar way, when it comes to explaining God’s truth, I’m like a child, content to affirm what the Bible teaches and willing to trust God for the things that are beyond me.

There are four basic ways of looking at the atoning work of Christ on the cross.

1. The cross provided atonement for no one. To some, the story of the cross is a myth or a tragic story of man’s inhumanity to man and nothing more. Islam teaches that it’s blasphemy to suggest that Allah would punish the innocent so the guilty could go free.

2. The cross provided atonement for everyone. This is the teaching that everyone will eventually be saved since the penalty for sin has been eliminated for every sinner on earth. Evangelism is simply letting people know the good news that they are already saved.

3. The cross provided atonement that is limited in effectiveness. With apologies to Arminians who might object to the term “limited”, this view teaches that while the work of Christ on the cross made it possible for everyone to be saved, it is not adequate to save anyone unless combined with the faith of a sinner.

4. The cross provided atonement that is limited in extent. This is the view that the cross did all that is necessary for salvation, but that it is applied only to the elect.

Did you know that atonement is actually an Old Testament term? It comes from the Hebrew word that means to cover something over. When the Jewish priest would complete the process of sacrifice and announce that atonement had been made, he was saying that the sins of the worshipper had been covered over. Guilt had been removed.

We make the issue more difficult than it needs to be by looking at the atonement as a theological monolith that must be all one thing or all another. The Bible itself doesn’t treat it that way. In fact, the New Testament never uses the word atonement, but instead is much more precise and uses terminology that describes different aspects of atonement that our Lord accomplished on the cross.

Is it possible then, that the New Testament teaches that some aspects of Christ’s atonement are unlimited and some are limited? I think it is. My goal is to keep this simple, so we won’t consider every verse in the Bible that deals with the issue. I’d simply like to clarify the matter for those who would like to see how the Bible can teach both at the same time.

First, it seems clear that the New Testament teaches that the death of Christ was for every sinner, at least to some extent. John says, in 1 John 2:2 that Christ, “ is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.” Paul teaches in 1 Timothy 2:6 that Christ, “gave Himself a ransom for all.” Then there is Peter who warned about false teachers (clearly unsaved) who deny “the Lord who bought them.” (2 Peter 2:1) Each of these aspects of the atonement falls into the category of what we might call “redemptive” aspects. Because of sin, there is a price that must be paid and there is penalty that must be endured and our Lord paid that price and endured the penalty for all the sin of the world.

And it is just as clear that Jesus taught that His death on the cross was only for the elect, at least to some extent. In John 10:11, for example, He said, “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.” And who are His sheep? The Lord defined that a few verses later when He addressed those who did not believe in Him, “But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you.” (See John 10:26-28.) The Lord also told His disciples in John 15:13, “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one's life for his friends.” Who are His friends? Again, they are His disciples, those who obey His commandments.

In both of these passages Jesus used a Greek preposition that means “in place of.” His death on the cross was “in place of” the sheep, and it was “in place of” His friends. Substitution is another aspect of His atonement and that was what the Lord had in mind. He died on the cross in place of sinners, but not all sinners. He was a substitute specifically for those who belong to Him.

Charles Spurgeon put it this way in one of his sermons: "To think that my Savior died for men in hell, seems a supposition too horrible for me to imagine. That He was the substitute for the sons of men, and that God having first punished the substitute, punished these same men again, seems to me to conflict with any idea of justice.” (From “The Mission of the Son of Man.”)

We’ll study the cross throughout eternity and never come to the end of it, but here are a couple of things we can know with certainty. To pay the penalty for all sin the Lord tasted death for every man. And to bring many sons to glory, He took the place of those sons under the wrath of God.