Chapter 2: Three more arguments refuting the idea of universal atonement
Therefore, the doctrine of universal redemption fails. It contradicts both Scripture and the clear testimony of history. The gospel has not been universally proclaimed, and therefore Christ's death cannot have been intended for all alike.
Book III, Chapter 2 Containing three other arguments.
Argument III: From the Necessity of the Condition Being Procured If Jesus Christ died for all people—that is, if He purchased and secured for them, in accordance with God's will, all the benefits of His death (summed up in the phrase "eternal redemption")—then He did so either absolutely or conditionally.
If absolutely, then all people without exception must certainly receive eternal redemption, since nothing could prevent them from enjoying what God absolutely intended and Christ fully purchased for them.
But if conditionally—meaning these blessings are only for those who fulfill some condition—then we must ask: did Christ also purchase that condition for them, or not?
If He did purchase the condition (such as faith), He either did so absolutely or on some further condition. If absolutely, then
again, those for whom He died must certainly believe and be saved, because the condition for salvation was secured as certainly as salvation itself.
This is what we affirm: Christ purchased salvation for His people to be received by faith—but He also absolutely purchased that very faith for them. Therefore, the condition is secured, and salvation is guaranteed.
However, if Christ only purchased the condition (faith) on another condition, the question simply repeats itself—what was that further condition? And so we are caught in an endless loop unless we fix upon a definite point. Eventually, it must either be absolutely procured or not procured at all.
On the other hand, if Christ did not purchase this condition (faith) for those for whom He died, then we are faced with even more problems:
1. Then the condition must be revealed to all for whom He died, as shown in Argument II.
2. Either all people are able to fulfill the condition (faith), or they are not. If they are, then salvation ultimately depends on man's free will, which contradicts Scripture. If they are not, then either:
God intends to give them the ability to believe, or He does not intend to do so.
If He does intend to give all people faith, why do not all believe? Why do not all possess faith, since God's purpose cannot fail?
If He does not intend to give them faith, then the result is this: God sent His Son to die for all people, on the condition that they believe— but He never intended to grant them the ability to believe, without which they can never be saved.
Is this not absurd? Would God intend to offer salvation on a condition He knows they cannot meet, and which He Himself will not enable them to meet?
Would it not be like offering a blind man a reward on condition that he sees, knowing full well he cannot open his eyes? Or offering liberty to captives on the condition that they break their own chains
—though they have no strength to do it?
Would Christ say, "I will secure eternal life for all men on condition that they believe—but I will not reveal that condition to many, and I will not grant them faith, which I know they cannot produce on their own"? What kind of purpose is that?
It is no purpose at all—it is a mockery. To offer redemption to those who cannot believe, and to refuse to grant them the faith required, is not a true offer but a cruel illusion.
In short, to intend to do someone good on condition of something you know he cannot do—and you will not help him do—is not a genuine intention to do him good. It is a vain flourish, void of truth and mercy.
Therefore, to say that Christ died to procure eternal redemption for all people, but only on condition that they believe—and yet not to secure faith for them—is to make His death unprofitable for them and unworthy of His purpose.
Finally, if God intends to save all if they believe, but Christ did not purchase faith for them, and they cannot believe by themselves—how then is anyone saved at all?
Some might object, "God gives faith to some and not to others." I respond: Was this distinguishing grace—this gift of faith—purchased by Christ for those who receive it, as compared to those who do not?
If yes, then it is clear Christ did not die equally for all. He died to give faith to some, but not to others. And since no one can be saved without faith, He effectively did not die for those who never receive it. That is, He did not intend for His death to result in their salvation.
But if no—if Christ did not purchase faith for those who are saved— then those who are saved have no more to thank Christ for than those who are damned. This would be absurd and would contradict the testimony of Revelation 1:5–6:
"To him who loved us and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and has made us kings and priests to God and his
Father..."
For my part, I believe that Christ fully accomplished salvation for His people—not merely on the condition that they would receive it, but in such a way that they would certainly receive it. He purchased salvation to be given to those who believe, and also purchased faith itself so that they would believe.
It cannot be objected that, in our view, God requires something from people—namely faith—that they are unable to do.
First, the commands of God (like "believe in Christ") do not reveal what God intends to bring about, but rather what is our duty. He
may command something even if we are unable to perform it. The command reveals our responsibility, not God's secret intention.
Second, the promises that are presented with the command to believe do not mean:
1. That God intended Christ to die for a person if they would believe (as if belief determines for whom He died—which would be absurd, because the object of faith must exist before we are called to believe in it); nor, 2. That Christ's death is only potentially useful, depending on whether we believe (as if Christ's death gains its power from our decision), which we've already disproved.
Rather, the promises show that faith is the appointed means to salvation. Everyone who believes will certainly be saved, because faith and salvation are inseparably joined. This connection is not arbitrary—it is God's appointed way of bringing His people into the blessings Christ purchased for them.
Argument IV. Distinctions in God's Eternal Purpose Prove Christ Did Not Die for All If God, by His eternal purpose, has divided all people into two distinct groups—clearly identified and described in Scripture—and if Christ is said to have died for only one of those groups, then it necessarily follows that He did not die for every individual. He died for all within one group, and for none in the other.
Now, Scripture does show such a distinction: between those whom God loves and those He hates (Romans 9:13); those He knows and those He does not know (John 10:14; 2 Tim. 2:19; Rom. 8:29;
Matt. 25:12); those who are chosen, foreknown, and appointed to life, and those who are rejected, ordained to condemnation, or fitted for destruction (Eph. 1:4; Acts 13:48; Rom. 8:30; 1
Thess. 5:9; Rom. 9:18–21; Jude 4; 2 Pet. 2:12; Matt. 25:32).
Scripture describes them variously as sheep and goats, children of promise and children of the flesh, God's church and the world, those whom He prays for and those He does not (John
17:9), those whom He shows mercy to, and those whom He hardens (Rom. 9:18).
These distinctions are consistently attributed to God's sovereign will and eternal purpose. For example, Romans 9:11–13 speaks of God's choice before birth, "that the purpose of God according to election might stand." Similarly, Romans 8:28–30 outlines the unbreakable chain of God's purpose—from foreknowing, to predestining, calling, justifying, and glorifying.
Now, Christ is clearly said to have died for His people (Matt. 1:21), His sheep (John 10:11, 14), His church (Acts 20:28; Eph. 5:25),
His elect (Rom. 8:32–34), and the children given to Him by the Father (Heb. 2:12–13). Never once is He said to have died for those whom He never knew, whom He hardens, to whom He will not show mercy, who were ordained to condemnation, or for whom He refused to pray. He did not die for the reprobate or the world in that sense.
Some object that although Scripture says Christ died for His sheep, His people, His elect, it never explicitly says He died for "them only."
But this objection carries no weight. Common sense and standard
language make clear that if Scripture distinguishes two opposite categories—like sheep and goats—and then says Christ died for the sheep, it is equivalent in meaning to saying He died for the sheep only. Scripture doesn't always use the word "only" when the meaning requires it. For instance, when Jesus says, "I am the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), He doesn't say "only," but we rightly understand that no one else can be the way. The sense is selflimiting.
Therefore, this argument stands firm: Christ died only for those whom the Father gave Him—His sheep, His elect—not for all humanity without distinction. This argument could be strengthened even further by a fuller explanation of election and reprobation, showing that Christ's death was appointed as a means for saving only the elect—not those whom God decreed to leave in their sins. More on that will follow, God willing.
Argument V. The Language of Scripture Does Not Teach Universal Redemption We should not affirm anything about Christ's work that Scripture does not clearly teach. But Scripture nowhere states that Christ died for all people, much less for each and every individual—which is a stronger claim still.
It is true that Christ is said to give His life as "a ransom for all" (1 Tim. 2:6), but nowhere is He said to die "for all men" in the absolute sense. And many other passages speak more specifically: that He died for many, for His church, for those who believe, for the children given Him by the Father, and for us—that is, believers. This includes the vision in Revelation 5:9–10, where the