WM 92: Rejoinder to a Lutheran's Objections to Limited Atonement

I have posted Word Magazine 92: Rejoinder to a Lutheran's Objections to Limited Atonement (listen here).

Jordan Cooper is a young Lutheran minister serving a congregation in Illinois (Faith Lutheran Church in Watseka). He also directs Just and Sinner Publications, hosts the Just and Sinner Podcast, and has an active youtube channel.

By his own report, Cooper is a former Calvinist and often expresses various criticisms of Reformed theology. He has written a critique of Reformed theology: Jordan Cooper, The Great Divide: A Lutheran Evaluation of Reformed Theology (Wipf and Stock, 2015).

I got an email back in November from someone who called my attention to an 18 minutes video posted by Jordan Cooper in April 2017. The video is titled, “Five Problem with Limited Atonement” (see it here).

Here is part of the email:

The main reason I’m contacting you is to request a topic for one of your podcasts. I would love to hear your response to a Lutheran pastor by the name of Jordan Cooper. He has an 18 minute YouTube video on the “5 Problems with Limited Atonement”….

I have an older brother, who introduced me to Calvinism many years ago who is now considering Lutheranism. He’s the one who sent me the video claiming that it contains a “powerful argument” against particular redemption right from the book of Hebrews.

In this episode I want to review and respond to Cooper’s critique of limited atonement. Here are some notes from my review:

Jordan Cooper’s Five Problems with Limited Atonement:

First: The Bible speaks of many who fell away but (who) were also bought by the blood of Christ.

He mentions two texts:

1.    Hebrews 10:29

Response: Is this a description of an apostate or a warning against becoming a backslidden believer who brings shame to the name of Jesus? I think it is the latter.

2.    2 Peter 2:1

Response: See John Owen’s assessment that these were “saints in show” and not genuine believers.

Second: Many texts speak about the universal nature of Christ’s saving work.

He mentions the following texts:

1.    1 John 2:2

Response: This verse does not refer to universal atonement but to the universal scope of the gospel: that all kinds of men (Jews and Gentiles) will be saved.

2.    1 Timothy 2:4

Response: 1 Timothy 2:4 is also a passage related to the universal scope of the gospel: that all kinds of men (Jews and Gentiles) will be saved. To measure the importance of that theme for Paul see Ephesians 3:1-6.

3.    1 Timothy 4:10

Response: See a blog post I recently wrote on this verse, as one of the prooftexts in the 2LBCF (1689) in the chapter on Providence (5:7). There I point out that this verse is not addressing salvation of all men but God’s providential care for all men, and especially for his saints.

Third: Limited Atonement is incompatible with the free offer of the gospel.

Response: Holding to the Biblical doctrine of the atonement in no way hinders the faithful preaching of the gospel. In fact, it is those who preach general atonement who weaken and distort the preaching of the gospel.

For a response to this see, J. I. Packer’s Introductory Essay in John Owen, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (Banner of Truth, 1959): 1-25 (esp. 16-17, 19).

See also David J. Engelsma, Hyper-Calvinism & The Call of the Gospel (Reformed Free Publishing Association, 1980).

Fourth: The book of Hebrews

Response: The book of Hebrews is in no way incompatible with the Reformed view of salvation. It exalts Christ as the once for all sacrifice. It is written to Jewish believers in order to exhort them to persevere in the faith. Aside from its pastoral purpose, it also has an evangelistic purpose, as it undoubtedly would have been read in congregations that would have included both believers and unbelievers.

John Owen completed seven volumes of commentaries on Hebrews and retained a consistent view of Reformed soteriology throughout (see here). Any so-called objections passages in Hebrews will find a satisfying interpretation in Owen.

I have preached a 46-part sermon series through the book (see here). I did not find anything within Hebrews to contradict Reformed soteriology.

Fifth: The words of Jesus

Cooper mentions Christ’s prayer from the cross in Luke 23:34 (BTW, We can confidently uphold the text of this prayer as genuine! See this post). Yes, we can say that his prayer was answered, not that in all who rejected Jesus were saved or given the hypothetical possibility of salvation, but that some were actually saved and had their sins forgiven under the preaching of the Gospel (see Acts 2:22-24, 37-38).

He mentions Judas and Christ’s words in the upper room to the disciples in Luke 22:19: “This is my body which is given for you.” Whether Judas was present or not is irrelevant. Jesus was not saying that he would die for Judas. His death would be for the elect. Even today, false professors take of the Supper unworthily.

Finally, he notes Christ’s prayer for the disciples in John 17:12. How could this apply to Judas?

He fails to pick up on the fact that in John there is peculiar language that is used for the choosing (election) of the disciples for service as disciples that does not have to do, necessarily, with Christ’s choosing (election) of the disciples for salvation (see John 6:70-71; 15:16). So, there is nothing inconsistent with saying, Jesus chose the Judas to be among the twelve, but he did not choose him for salvation.

Concluding Response:

It is typical of those who reject limited atonement (the Biblical doctrine of redemption) to raise objection passages like these.

As we have demonstrated, when rightly divided these passages do not contradict limited atonement.

If they did, Scripture would be incoherent. It is those who hold to general or universal redemption who must explain how they make sense of the passages that, we believe, so clearly teach limited atonement, or particular redemption, including:

Isaiah 53:11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

Matthew 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Mark 10:45 For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

John 10:15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

1 Corinthians 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

The onus is on the defenders of universal atonement to exegete and interpret how these passages support their position.

Additional resources:

Sermons from sermonaudio.com:

My sermon series on the doctrines of grace

Alpheus Atkins’ 2017 Youth Conference series on the doctrines of grace

More blog articles on this topic:

Nine Observations on Limited Atonement

Limited Atonement: Responding to Objection Passages

He tasted death for every man (Hebrews 2:9)

Behold the Lamb of God (John 1:29)

JTR

The Vision (12.15.17): The Saviour of all men (1 Timothy 4:10)

Image: Snow on holly bush, December 2017, North Garden, Virginia

Note: Devotion taken from last Sunday's sermon in the 1689 confession series.

For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe (1 Timothy 4:10).

The final paragraph in chapter five of the 1689 Baptist Confession, “Of Divine Providence,” stresses God’s special care for his church:

Paragraph 7. As the providence of God doth in general reach to all creatures, so after a more special manner it taketh care of His church, and disposes of all things to the good thereof.

The first prooftext listed is 1 Timothy 4:10. This is a verse much disputed by our Arminian friends, who like to see it as a proof for “universal” redemption, as opposed to particular redemption or limited atonement.

I believe, however, that the framers of the confession were very intentional in their use of this prooftext at this point. By citing it here, they were making the point that this verse does not address the doctrine of salvation or redemption but providence.

Look at the context. Paul is writing to encourage the young minister Timothy, urging him to remember that in the midst of difficult labors and the suffering of reproach, he should trust in the living God. He is not addressing here the doctrine of salvation, but that of providence. In this context he refers to the Lord as “the Saviour (Greek: Soter) of all men.”  This term can indeed can be used to refer to the God of the Bible as a Redeemer. It can also, however, be used to refer to God as a Provider. The Romans could refer to their emperors as “saviors,” not meaning that they provided spiritual salvation, but material protection. To call God “the Saviour of all men” here would be parallel to Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 5:45 that God causes the rain to fall and the sun to shine on both the just and the unjust.

In his commentary on this verse, John Calvin sees the main point as being that believers lose nothing of God’s providence when they are tried by adversity. He thus takes “Saviour” here as “a general term” denoting “one who defends and preserves.” He concludes that Paul’s meaning here is “that the kindness of God extends to all men.” If God’s goodness and care extends to all men, then, “how much more is it experienced by the godly, who hope in him?”

Matthew Poole, likewise, takes “Saviour” as used here to mean, “The Preserver of all man, the Preserver of man and beast.” He compares this verse to Psalm 33:18-19, where one finds a similar stress on God’s preservation of his people. Poole adds:

This seemeth rather to be the sense of the text, than to understand it of eternal salvation, for so God is not the actual Savour of all; besides that the text seemeth to speak of a work proper to the Father, rather than to the Son.

Poole does indeed raise a major issue with the Arminian interpretation. If “the Saviour of all men” is taken as a reference to general atonement, it lends support to the unsavory notion of universal salvation, a concept clearly counter to the Biblical witness (cf. John 3:36).

So, 1 Timothy 4:10 does not contradict the doctrines of grace. When Scripture is “rightly divided” it must be interpreted as a testimony to God’s special care for his people. If he provides for all men, will he not, all the more, provide for his own dear people?

Grace and peace, Pastor Jeff Riddle

The Vision (10.16.15): He tasted death for every man

Here are some notes from last Sunday morning’s sermon on Hebrews 2:5-9:

At the close of Hebrews 2:9, we see the wonder of the substitutionary atonement:  “that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.”

The suffering death of Jesus was not the death of a martyr.  It was not the death of a man who merely dies for a righteous cause.  It was a death that had spiritual significance and gained a tangible reward for others.

We need to acknowledge that there have been those who have misunderstood the meaning of this final phrase.  In particular, it is argued that this final statement contradicts or refutes the doctrine of limited atonement or particular redemption.  When it says Christ “tasted death for every man” it is argued that this means universal atonement.

To rightly divide the Word of God here we need to consider the following:

1.  “Every man” does not mean every person without exception.

“Every man” is the translators’ rendering of one Greek adjective pantos.  Christ tasted death “for every man [hyper pantos].”   Rather than assuming that the only possible meaning of this phrase is “every person without exception,” on a purely grammatical basis it must be admitted that the meaning might just as well be “every one of God’s elect” or “every saint” or “every believer” or “every redeemed man.”

2.  If we take the universal atonement interpretation, it leads to some troubling theological conclusions.

Most significantly such a view implies universal salvation or universalism.  This “love wins” mindset is particularly popular with many in our day.   If Christ tasted death for the sins of every single person without exception then this means that every single person without exception has been saved.  This, however, is clearly not what Scripture teaches (cf. John 3:36).

Many evangelical Arminians, of course, reject universal salvation and say this verse teaches that though Christ tasted death for every single person without exception there are still those who will reject Christ.  The problem with this view is that it empties the cross of its efficacy.  According to this view, Christ did not actually save anyone on the cross.  He only potentially saved people.  If the Arminian counters that Christ did indeed die for actual sins on the cross, then it suggests the illogical and unseemly notion that there are persons in hell for whose sins Christ died, but they are still under the wrath of God.

3.  We must interpret Scripture by Scripture. 

We can only understand what Hebrews 2:9 means by looking to the whole counsel of Scripture, which would include the following:

Isaiah 53:11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

Matthew 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Mark 10:45 For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

John 10:15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

1 Corinthians 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

The only conclusion we can reach is that Hebrews 2:9 does not teach universal redemption or hypothetic redemption.

John Owen in his comments on this verse notes that the pantos in v. 9 refers to “all and every one of the children unto whom he was a captain of salvation” (Vol. 3, p. 322).

Thus, it is both a solemn and a joyful reminder to the saints of God of what God in Christ has done for us.  The death of Christ was a death which won freedom for every person who by the grace of God would come to repent of his sins and turn to him in saving faith.  He not only tasted physical death for the elect, but he tasted spiritual death for us.  The wrath of God for our sin was laid upon his shoulders.  By his stripes we are healed.

Grace and peace, Pastor Jeff Riddle