Book III — Arguments Against Universal Redemption
With the foundation laid, and the false view exposed, we now proceed to build up the positive arguments that confirm this truth, and refute the objections brought against it. But before we do, we urge the reader to keep in mind the core principles we have established so far. Without those, the arguments to come cannot be rightly understood.
– End of Book II –
Book 3, Chapter 1 Arguments Against the Universality of Redemption Argument 1: From the Nature of the New Covenant and Its Application Our first argument against universal redemption comes from the very nature of the new covenant, which was established, ratified, and confirmed by the death of Christ. Jesus Himself called His blood "the blood of the new covenant" (Matt. 26:28), because in His death He sealed that covenant as its Testator.
Now here is the key point: the benefits of Christ's death do not extend beyond the reach of this covenant. If Christ's blood sealed this covenant, then those for whom He died are the same as
those who are in covenant with God. But this new covenant is not universal—it was never made with every individual in the world.
Rather, it is made particularly with God's people, His elect.
Biblical Witness to the Covenant This is clearly taught in Jeremiah 31:31–34 and reiterated in Hebrews 8:9–11:
"This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts... No longer will they teach their neighbor... for they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest."
Notice what distinguishes this covenant: God does not merely require obedience—He promises to create it. He puts His law within, He writes it on the heart, and He guarantees that those in the covenant will know Him. It is not based on our performance—it is rooted in His promise to transform.
This is what sets the new covenant apart from the old:
Under the old covenant, God said: Do this and live.
Under the new, God says: I will cause you to walk in my ways.
If this inward transformation—faith, repentance, love—is not present in a person, then that person is not in the covenant. And since all do not believe, all are not included in this covenant.
A Covenant with the Elect, Not the World
But someone may object: "Yes, God promises to write His law on hearts—but only if we believe." But that makes no sense. God would be saying: If you have my law written on your heart, then I will write my law on your heart. That's circular reasoning and makes the promise meaningless.
Faith is not the condition we must fulfill in order to enter the covenant—faith is the result of the covenant. The covenant itself promises to create the very faith it requires.
Moreover, how could God be said to make this covenant with people who have never heard the gospel, or who die in darkness, ignorance, or rebellion? God made the covenant of grace with Adam, and Adam knew it (Gen. 3:15). He renewed it with Noah, who proclaimed its promise. He reaffirmed it with Abraham, along with the promise that through his seed all nations would be blessed (Gen. 12). In all these cases, God revealed the covenant to those with whom He made it. But it is absurd to say that God entered into covenant with people who never heard of it or never received any grace to believe it.
Even in Genesis 3:15, God makes a clear distinction: the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent are set apart. Will anyone dare to say that God entered into a covenant of grace with the serpent's seed?
The Blood of Christ Is for the Covenanted People The new covenant is therefore a distinguishing mercy, limited to those whom God foreknew and loved from eternity—His elect. The
blood of Christ, being the blood of this covenant, was shed specifically to secure the blessings promised in the covenant.
Jesus is called the surety (guarantor) of this covenant (Heb. 7:22)— He stood in for its members and bore their guilt. He had no obligation to represent others outside the covenant. It would be inconceivable to say that His death was intended for those not included in that very covenant His blood sealed.
Argument II: From the Necessity of Revelation for Faith If God truly intended that Christ's death should procure pardon and reconciliation for all people—provided they believe—then it follows that this goodwill and intention, along with the benefits Christ purchased, must be made known to them through the Word. As Paul says, "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing through the Word of Christ" (Rom. 10:17). If these truths are not revealed to all those whom God supposedly intends to save by Christ's death, then only two possibilities remain:
1. Either people can be saved without faith in Christ, which is unbiblical and impossible, since Christ is the only way to the Father; 2. Or God's intention and Christ's work are ultimately in vain for those who never hear of them. It would be no benefit to them, nor could it be used to condemn them, for how can they be judged for not receiving what they never knew existed?
Would it align with God's wisdom to send Christ to die for sinners with the intent that they be saved through faith, yet never cause the message of salvation to reach them? Would it be fitting for Christ to secure redemption for people who will never so much as hear of it? Is
it credible that He would open a fountain for cleansing and then hide it from the vast majority of those for whom He supposedly opened it?
This would be as if a prince declared he had ransomed a group of captives, provided they would come and receive their freedom, but never informed them that they had been ransomed, or even gave them the means to find out. Or as if a physician had a cure for a deadly disease and promised to heal all who would take it, yet never told most of the sick about the remedy.
Yet this is exactly the case if Christ died for all, while multitudes live and die without ever hearing of Him. Both Scripture and experience testify that God has not made known His covenant of grace to all nations or all people. Under the Old Covenant, God revealed Himself primarily to Israel—"He declares His word to Jacob… He has not dealt thus with any other nation" (Ps. 147:19–20). "In Judah God is known; His name is great in Israel" (Ps. 76:1).
And even now, under the New Covenant, despite the gospel reaching many nations, large parts of the world remain unreached. The Holy
Spirit even forbade the apostles at times from going to certain places (Acts 16:6–7). God still allows many nations to walk in darkness, as He did in times past (Acts 14:16). Millions today live and die never hearing the name of Christ. Can we seriously claim that Christ died for all these, yet God never intended that they should hear of Him?
Let any objector say what they will—this fact remains: countless multitudes have never had Christ or the gospel revealed to them.
How then can it be said that God intended Christ to save them on condition of faith, when He never granted them the means to believe?