1st John 2:1
My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.
The “whole world” is the key here. Some Calvinists, namely 5-Point Calvinists, who wish to maintain the Calvinist doctrine of a Limited Atonement, are left trying to explain that it does not mean the whole entire world, as in everybody, but merely, some of all types in the world. This is difficult of itself, and which is made even more difficult when you consider other verses that use similar expressions. For instance, consider Romans 3:19-20, which states: “Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.” So would a 5-Point Calvinist give a similar explanation here as well, as in, some of all types, but not everyone altogether? Otherwise if not, then why the inconsistency?
Jerry Vines: “If you are a lost person, however, not a word of this applies to your sin. If you are lost, every time you sin you are piling up wrath against the judgment day of God. You have no advocate; you have no propitiation. But Jesus said that he died for the sins of the whole world and he is the propitiation for the whole world. He died for you and if you will come to Jesus, if you will come with that load of your sin, he will wash you as white as snow.” (Exploring 1-2-3 John, p.46, emphasis mine)
In other words, no unbeliever has had the wrath of God removed. (John 3:18) Instead, unbelievers have an atonement available to them, in which they must look upon Christ, as analogous to John 3:14 / Numbers 21:6-9, in order to receive the benefits of the atonement.
Question: But if God has already accepted the propitiation, why does the wrath of God still apply to anyone?
Answer: This is best answered by considering John 3:14 and Numbers 21:6-9, in that what God accepted was the atonement which made salvation available. Even despite the serpent on the standard, and its availability, one still had to look to it, or else it was of none effect.
Question: Where does the wrath come from, if it was propitiated?
Answer: When we become in Christ, we are no longer under the Law, having passed out of death and into life, as per John 5:24. Romans 8:2 states: “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.” Propitiation deals with God’s acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice, but unless, and until, we are “in Christ,” through faith in Him, we remain alienated from this propitiation, and remain under the curse and condemnation of the Law.
If God is appeased by the sacrifice of Christ, and if Christ satisfied the Law requirements, then there is nothing left for Christ to do: It is finished. All that would be left is for people to look upon Him and live, because His part with God is finished and fully accepted.
Consider the Old Testament example of the serpent on a standard at Numbers 21:6-9. Jesus used this event as an illustration of Calvary at John 3:14. There, the atonement was made “for” all who needed physical healing, which was accessed by looking upon it. So, too, the provision for spiritual healing, according to the Gospel of John, is accessed upon looking upon Christ in faith, and that’s the basis for the analogy.
Question: Is Jesus currently propitiating for people in Hell right now?
Answer: No. Those who are in Hell have missed their opportunity to receive Christ’s atonement, and now are paying the penalty of the Law. The promise of John 3:16 is intended for the living.
Question: Who is Jesus a propitiation “for”?
Answer: The “whole world.” Jesus died “for” the whole world, which is evident from the fact that the Bible repeatedly states that Jesus is the Savior of the world:
John 1:29: “The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, ‘Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!’”
John 4:42: “‘It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves and know that this One is indeed the Savior of the world.’”
John 6:51: “‘I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.’”
John 12:47: “‘If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.’”
Question: What is the context of the “whole world” in 1st John chapter 2?
Answer: 1st John 2:15-17 states: “Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever.” Whereas God hates sin, He loves the sinners of “the world” (John 3:16), who were created in His image, and thus He sent His Son to be the “Savior of the world.” (1st John 4:14) Psalm 145:9 states: “The LORD is good to all, and His mercies are over all His works.” God doesn’t just love some people, and then abandon the rest, as being eternally unwanted spiritual fetuses.
Question: 1st John 5:19 states: “We know that we are of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.” So does this instance of the “whole world” just mean the “whole church” or “all in the world who believe”?
Answer: Calvin comments: “The whole world is under the control of the evil one. No doubt the apostle includes the whole human race here.” (1, 2, 3 John: Calvin/Henry, The Crossway Classic Commentaries, p.103, emphasis mine) So where, then, is the consistency? Calvinists do the same thing at John 3:16, when they insist at v.16 that “the world” really means the world “of the elect,” while admitting at v.17, that Jesus was sent into “the world” of more than just the elect. Again, where is the consistency?
Question: So how do Calvinists explain this?
Answer: Whole world...of the Calvinism’s elect.
Calvinist, James White: “Christ’s substitutionary death in behalf of His people is a real and finished work: It is not dependent upon the human act of faith for failure or success.” (Debating Calvinism, p.191, emphasis mine)
Our faith does not trigger God’s acceptance of Christ’s work at Calvary. That’s instead a matter between God and Christ. Faith in Christ is what gets Christ’s God-approved provision applied to our account. If not for trusting in Christ, we would remain indefinitely under condemnation (John 3:18), and the provision expire as unclaimed.
Dave Hunt commented that if Christ’s death automatically saved Calvinism’s elect, then the elect were “never lost to begin with,” and what is there left for faith to accomplish that hasn’t already been netted by the provision?
The provision has been made. The price has been paid. All that is left is to receive by faith, what God has already provided. However, if we “neglect” Christ’s offering (Hebrews 2:3), then we will be held even more accountable to the wrath of God. (Acts 17:30)
However, 5-Point Calvinists reject that Jesus has died “for” the whole world, if by the “whole world,” everyone is intended, since Calvinists infer that Jesus died only “for” the world of those who comprise the alleged, eternal flock of the Father:
Calvinist, Erwin Lutzer: “Perhaps John meant that Christ was the propitiation for all in the world who believe, regardless of nationality or rank.” (The Doctrines That Divide, p.186, emphasis mine)
John Calvin: “For John’s purpose was none other than to make this benefit common to the whole church. By the word whole, then, he does not mean to include the reprobate, but he means those who would believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world.” (1, 2, 3 John: Calvin/Henry, The Crossway Classic Commentaries, p.30, emphasis mine)
John Calvin: “Wherever the faithful are dispersed throughout the world, John extends to them the expiation wrought by Christ’s death.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.148, emphasis mine)
Instead of using a Secret Will argument, Calvin and Lutzer employ an Of The Elect defense, such that Jesus is the propitiation for “all in the the world who believe,” the “whole church” of the “faithful,” that is, all those of the elect. One verse that is offered in defense is John 11:51-52, which states: “Now he did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.” The part about “in order” speaks of purpose, and the purpose of the atonement is to redeem the Church, that is, to bestow eternal life upon believers, just as the purpose for the bronze serpent at Numbers 21:6-9 was to provide healing to those who looked upon it. God’s Will is that everyone (i.e. “those scattered abroad”) be in the church, which of course is why He commands all to repent, and thus the atonement is universal toward all those in whom He commands to repent, in order that those who do repent, may receive the benefits of the atonement.
You cannot offer what you don’t have. In order to be the Savior of the world, Jesus had to be the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” Jesus literally took away the sin of the whole world. That’s what He was sent to do, and that’s what He accomplished. The power of sin and spiritual death were broken. All sin was nailed to the cross at Calvary. No person’s sin was left out. That includes every sin ever committed, or will ever be committed, past, present and future. Jesus died for all, and all may receive the bona fide offer of Christ’s free gift of grace, if they will only meet the Father’s decreed condition of eternal life according to John 3:16. This cannot be true if Jesus only died for a few. You cannot legitimately offer a substitutionary payment, if you haven’t already paid it. The offer of this grace expires upon death, and yes, it can be left unclaimed. (Hebrews 2:3) Of course, this draws the Calvinistic charge that by such reasoning, there exists the possibility that Jesus could have died on the cross to secure the salvation of all, and then none receive it, and then the virtue of Calvary gone completely to waste. However, this is clearly nonsense when you consider that by the time of the Cross, you already have the faithful of Israel waiting in Abraham’s Bosom. (Luke 16:19-31)
John Calvin: “Georgius thinks he argues very acutely when he says: Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world; and hence those who wish to exclude the reprobate from participation in Christ must place them outside the world. For this, the common solution does not avail, that Christ suffered sufficiently for all, but efficaciously only for the elect. By this great absurdity, this monk has sought applause in his own fraternity, but it has no weight with me. Wherever the faithful are dispersed throughout the world, John extends to them the expiation wrought by Christ’s death. But this does not alter the fact that the reprobate are mixed up with the elect in the world. It is incontestable that Christ came for the expiation of the sins of the whole world. But the solution lies close at hand, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but should have eternal life (Jn 3.15).” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, pp.148-149, emphasis mine)
John Calvin: “The evangelist John sets forth the office of Christ as nothing else than by His death to gather the children of God into one (Jn 11:52). Hence, we conclude that, though reconciliation is offered to all through Him, yet the benefit is peculiar to the elect, that they may be gathered into the society of life. However, while I say it is offered to all, I do not mean that this embassy, by which on Paul’s testimony (II Cor 5:18) God reconciles the world to Himself, reaches to all, but that it is not sealed indiscriminately on the hearts of all to whom it comes so as to be effectual.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.149, emphasis mine)
Obviously, I viewed #1 as his intention, which I inferred as his attempt to mitigate against the argument raised by Georgius. Here is further evidence of why this is the correct way to take him:
John Calvin: “That Christ, the redeemer of the whole world, commands the Gospel to be preached promiscuously to all does not seem congruent with special Election. ... But the solution of the difficulty lies in seeing how the doctrine of the Gospel offers salvation to all. That it is salvific for all I do not deny. But the question is whether the Lord in His counsel here destines salvation equally for all.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, pp.102, 103, emphasis mine)
John Calvin: “Therefore Christ intends that the benefit of his death should extend to everyone; so people who exclude anyone from that hope of salvation are doing Christ a disservice.” (1 & 2 Timothy & Titus: Calvin, The Crossway Classic Commentaries, p.40, emphasis mine)
The Calvinism that Calvin knew was this kind of formula: Elective Grace predetermines Regenerative Grace which results in Persevering Grace. There was no Limited Atonement in his formula.
Calvinist, R.C. Sproul: “To be sure, Christ’s propitiation on the cross is unlimited in its sufficiency or value. In this sense Christ makes an atonement for the whole world. But the efficacy of this atonement does not apply to the whole world, nor does its ultimate design.” (What is Reformed Theology?, p.177, emphasis mine)
Question: What does the Calvinist expression of “sufficient for all; efficient only for the elect” actually mean?
Answer: For the Arminian, the sufficiency of the Atonement means that Jesus died for all, and all can be saved, and that the efficiency of the Atonement means that eternal life is only transmitted to believers. In contrast, for the Calvinist, the sufficiency of the Atonement means that all could be saved, had that been God’s design for all, and that the efficiency of the Atonement means that God monergistically applies the Atonement to none but the elect, as defined by Calvinism.
Two ways to views to view this:
(1) The atonement of Christ is available to all men, and is efficacious for believers (i.e. those who “look” to Christ, as per the imagery of Numbers 21:6-9), and thus the Atonement is a finished work, approved by God, universal in availability, though synergistic in individual application to whosoever will.
(2) The Atonement is monergistically applied to the elect (as defined by Calvinism), and none other are enabled to benefit from it, and thus though the Atonement is made to appear as available for all men (for good public relations, and to make it appear that God is universally generous), God (as defined by Calvinists) is propitious toward none but Calvinism’s elect. Any other way to explain it is just slick PR work, and Calvinist are skilled in PR.
Much of the controversy involving a Limited Atonement vs. Unlimited Atonement is resolved in those very sentiments, which is why I contend that there is not a dime’s worth of difference between a 4-Point Calvinist and a 5-Point Calvinist. To be sure, there is a lot of haggling over certain verses, but ultimately, it can be agreed that the purpose of Calvary was to redeem the Church. The real controversy is over whether God genuinely desires to have all men enter in His Church, in order to receive the benefits of His atonement. Plainly stated, by Unlimited Atonement, Arminians are not suggesting that unbelievers experience the benefits of Christ’s atonement. Rather, what is meant is that Jesus died “for” everyone, so that His provision is available to everyone, which puts substance behind His indiscriminate offer of salvation to the lost. To the Calvinist, this makes Jesus a mere potential Savior, rather than an actual Savior, and this is true, to the extent that by Jesus’ death on the Cross, potentially anyone at all can be saved. On the flip-side, Calvinists also argue that this must also mean that potentially, no one at all might have been saved, if no one had received Him, which is actually a rather poorly thought-out argument, given the fact that when Jesus was on the Cross, Abraham’s Bosom was already full of the Old Testament saints. Nevertheless, this line of discussion builds into the real center of debate, which is the Calvinist doctrine of Unconditional Election:
Calvinist, Alan Kurschner: “God desires that his sheep are saved. God desires that his people are saved. He does not desire that every single individual who has ever lived, live in glory with him forever. If that were the case, we have an incompetent, unhappy, and impotent God.” (The Calvinist Gadfly, emphasis mine)
Calvinist: “In terms of 1st John 2:1-2, consider an illustration using a ‘town doctor.’ The ‘town doctor’ may not see everyone in town, but he is the only doctor for the whole town. Similarly, Jesus is the ‘Savior of the world,’ which means that He is the one and only Savior that the world is offered. So despite the accusations, I do take ‘world’ literally in that passage.”
Non-Calvinist: “In your ‘town doctor’ illustration, the town doctor has already purchased what is needed to heal everyone, and he offers it to everyone, completely free of charge. So if anyone in that town should die of sickness, it is because they did not receive the free offer. Now, can you say that the healing for this one was neither covered, nor free, even though he would not come and receive the gift of healing? He died, but not because healing was not already purchased for him, and not because it wasn’t offered to him. He died simply because He refused to accept the gift that was already paid and freely offered to him. The doctor was grieved because he paid a great price to heal this man. On the other hand, if the doctor said, ‘I have purchased just enough medicine for some of you. I will pick the ones that I will give this healing to without cost. I purposely chose not to purchase enough medicine to heal all of you, but I am the doctor and I have the authority to make that choice. The rest of you that are not chosen, will die. That’s my good pleasure.’ Some Calvinists actually think that way about God. However, just as the town doctor has the ‘Hippocratic Oath’ by which he has sworn to uphold, God has the Holy Scriptures which He has sworn to uphold.”
In the youtube clip, Calvinist James White is debating with Catholic theologian, Robert Sungenis. Obviously there are things upon which we all agree, such as the Deity of Christ and the bodily resurrection, and we wouldn’t want to toss those theologies out, simply because they are held by Catholics as well. So we wouldn’t want to throw out the doctrine of an Unlimited Atonement, simply because it is also held by Catholics. What perplexes me is the fact that James White cites Revelation 5:9 in defense of his logic, which doesn’t seem to add up. Revelation 5:9 states: “And they sang a new song, saying, ‘Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.’” I suppose that a Calvinist would infer that the “men” purchased are the elect men, and the elect men are drawn from the base pool of the whole world, that is, people from “every tribe and tongue and people and nation.” It would seem, then, that this is simply a euphemism for the whole world. Certainly, the Calvinists do believe that the Calvinistically elect are indeed drawn from the base pool of the whole world. Well, at 1st John 2:1-2, it is precisely this world that has a propitiation. By James White’s reasoning, though, this would necessarily entail Universalism, because everyone who HAS a propitiation, must therefore BE propitiated. However, this is a forced conclusion, because if you consider the analogy of Numbers 21:6-9, should we infer that every snake victim was necessarily propitiated, simply by virtue of the existence of the serpent on the standard? Of course, that is verifiably false, since God stated that the only ones who receive the benefits of the propitiation are those who actually look upon the standard. Similarly, then, everyone in the world, that is, people from every tribe and tongue and people and nation, HAVE a propitiation, but are not necessarily propitiated unless or until they actually look upon Christ in faith, and only then receive the benefits of the propitiation, which includes eternal life. This is fairly straight-forward, and it shows that both Revelation 5:9 and 1st John 2:1-2 are in agreement that the base pool of the whole world is what is in focus.
If the text is saying that the atonement of 1st John 2:1-2 is for all of both A and B, and if A and B comprise all of humanity, then all really does mean all.
In other words, if the text is saying that the atonement of 1st John 2:1-2 is for all of both Jews and Gentiles, and if Jews and Gentiles comprise all of humanity, then the atonement really is for all humanity. It’s a provision available for all.
The sacrifice of Jesus upon the cross satisfied God’s requirement for the payment of sin.
