Dear Sir,
An interesting article on definite atonement in the March EN. This doctrine has been presented to me many times over the years, and it seems that a case can be made both for it and against it. Of course only those who are the elect will be saved, but I prefer Spurgeon’s illustration rather than spending more time on a subject that can be neither proved nor disproved. He saw the sign over the gates of heaven with writing on both sides – those outside read ‘whosoever will may come’, while those inside read the inscription ‘these are the elect’. That’s how it will end up, so is it worth spending time trying to work out that which cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of everyone?
If it is true, what are we to make of 1 John 2.2, which tells us that ‘he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world’. And when Jesus said that he wanted to gather the people of Jerusalem ‘as a mother hen gathers her chicks, but you would not’, then either they were not part of the elect, or they were using their free will to thwart the purposes of God – which means that God is not omnipotent. The end result is the same. If Christ indeed knew in advance those that would receive him and died for them alone, then we have countless people for whom the invitation in Revelation is not only pointless, but also extremely cruel: ‘Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life’. He would be holding out hope of rescue which he has no intention of fulfilling.
