DID JESUS DIE FOR ALL MEN? (Elder FA Chick)

This is an excellent article on the atonement of Christ for His people - ed.

While we desire to commend the kind and Christian-like tone of the letter of Sister Turrell on page 234. Yet we feel that we must present a few thoughts in reply to some statements which she has made. We can heartily respond from our own experience to many things which she has said. And feel sure that she has been taught to know the plague of her own heart, and that the salvation is of the Lord. We can from her letter, but believe that the Lord has been teaching her and all such have peace in him. But yet, as we said, we could not publish her letter without calling attention to one or two things, especially to the scriptures which she has quoted. We do all this the more willingly because these are among the scriptures which have been used for many years past by believers in the theory of a general atonement to sustain their theory. This idea of a general atonement and special application is as old as Andrew Fuller of England. Who flourished among the Baptists? There, near the close of the last century. We know not whether it is any older than the day mentioned, but we do know that the apostles of the Lamb did not teach such a theory as we hope to show or we close this article. We understand this theory to be that while Christ died for everybody at the same time, the God of heaven did not purpose that everybody should reap the benefits of his debt. It seems to us to amount to this. That Christ meant to save everyone, but the purpose of the Holy Spirit was to save but part of mankind. The Atonement covered the sins of all mankind, but the Holy Spirit applies the blood of the Atonement. To but a portion of men, according to this theory.

The expressions to which our sister has called attention, as will be seen by reference to her letter. Were used by us in an editorial. We said that we must protest against the expression that Christ died for all the world and that we know of no greater absurdity than the assertion that Christ died for all the world when at the same time He designed to save but a part of mankind. When we wrote those expressions, we had in mind this theory of Andrew Fuller. To which we have just now alluded. It has ever seemed. As absurd. To say that Christ paid a redemption price for more than he meant should be his. Why should he die for the non-elect? Why should his blood for those who were fitted for the destruction whom he knew never could be saved or be washed in that blood? It is conceivable that God before the world was, should choose out from among mankind some whom He would love and finally redeem. And yet in the supreme act of this redemption, the Atonement changed His purpose, and in the Atonement embrace everybody. If he meant to save everybody when Jesus hung dying on the cross, then he always meant to save everybody, and he still means to save everybody. For the scriptures testify that he is in one mind, and none can turn him. One part of the work of redemption can embrace no more than another part of it. God's purpose and the atonement are just as broad as his purpose in the effectual calling by his Holy Spirit. This must be so or Jehovah is divided against himself and his Son. Jesus Christ means one thing while the Holy Spirit means another. We do not have any idea that our sister Turrell would assent to such things as we have been saying, but yet they are the necessary result of this theory of a general atonement and a special application. This theory must always be, to say the best of it, hopelessly confusing to the mind.

Andrew Fuller invented this theory in order that he might have an excuse for addressing all men as gospel subjects and telling them that they could be saved if they would. Out of this grew up among Baptists every phase and form of the modern effort system, including mourners, benches, protracted meetings, and all the multiplied machinery by which it is sought to convert them. It is safe to say that of the aiders and abettors of such means of salvation as they are called, not one of them really believes in salvation by grace alone, or in election, or in effectual calling by the Holy Spirit. There is not one of them, but feels himself called to a work beyond that which to master once assigned to Peter. Feed my sheep, feed my lambs. This theory is a joy and a delight to those who love to praise man rather than God, and who will be greatly grieved if they do not have the highest seat in heaven and wear a crown, be decked with more stars than any of their companions. Because Sister Terrell feels, as she has said, to be a great Sinner, saved by grace alone, and fitted for heaven by the power of God alone. We desire her to see the results of this theory, that Christ atones for the whole world, are. We are persuaded that she, as well as all those who, as the Chief of sinners saved by great grace, will start back with abhorrence. From a theory that involves such horrible and God-dishonoring results.

Before noticing the Scriptures to which our sister has referred, we desire in all faithfulness and love to call attention to another thing. Our sister speaks of this Having been revealed to her. We desire to caution her and all who love the Lord again, accepting anything as a revelation from God unless it is to be found in harmony with the scriptures. No matter how clear this view may be, nor how much it may be borne in upon our minds. If it is not in harmony with the plain testimony of the scriptures, we must not accept it as being from God. To the law and to the testimony. If they speak not according to his word, it is because there is no light in them. If our sister's revelation that Christ died for the whole world be of God, then we shall find the proof of it in Scripture. If the scriptures do not say so, then the revelation is not from God. But is either a figment of our own brain, or else we have it from the enemy. No man's view, not even his own. It's the standard. We are all liable to err in all things. We doubt not that such a man as Doctor Gill, for instance, who was no doubt an able minister of the New Testament, was often mistaken in his view of many things. So we would urge upon Sister Turo, and upon all who may read this to be. Where of any testimony say the testimony of the scriptures? Do not trust your own experience any further than you have the law and the testimony.

But now we will come to notice the scriptures referred to in her letter. The first text referred to is first John 2.1, 2. If the whole world in this text means all mankind or every individual the human race. Then there is no escape from the doctrine of universal salvation. For it is said he is the propitiation. This means that he is what appears or propitiates, and nothing can be clearer than this, that if the work of propitiation has been accomplished for all men, then all men are saved. The expression "the whole world" cannot mean every individual of the human race would all involving too much. For anybody but the man who is ready to accept the doctrine of universal salvation. We doubt not. The phrase the whole world here means that it does in many other places. The fact that Gentiles as well as Jews are to receive the blessings of the gospel covenant. Christ died not for the Jews only, but also for His people all over the world. There is no other propitiation for any man than Jesus.

In the second text, Romans 518, the term all men is used. A careful reading of the connection of this scripture will show that the apostle is not arguing that all men are saved, but that men are saved freely by grace through the merit of Jesus Christ. Hence the term. All men, also, if used in its broadest sense, would prove universalism to be true. If the free gift has come upon any man through the righteousness of Christ, unto justification of life. What more can be done for that man? He is saved beyond a para adventure. This use of the language of the apostle would prove too much unless, as said before, the doctrine of universalism is true. The evident meaning of the apostle is that all men who are condemned are sold through the transgressions of one man. Adam. So all men who are justified and saved are surely obedience of one man, Christ.

The third text referred to is Psalm. 136.8, 9. It seems to us only needful to say that the psalmist is here setting forth the same glorious truth as often prophesied of. That under the coming gospel day, all nations as well as the Jews should share the blessings of the covenant of grace. Surely our sister can see clearly that it is not true that every individual of the human race bows down before the Lord and worships him.

The fourth text is John 129. Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world. The fifth text is John 317. But that the world through him might be saved. It seems to us to require but little more to be said than has been said concerning the other texts. If the sin of everyone, of the race of men has been taken away. They are all saved now and nothing can hinder their final glory. If each individual of the human race is meant in John 3.17, then as said before, universalism is true. The world in each text, unless we admit universalism, must be understood to mean just this. That Jesus' work was not for the Jews only, but for the Gentiles as well. And the reason this is so frequently enforced and restated in the New Testament arose from the fact that the Jews claimed the Messiah was to come as their own exclusively. Even those who received and believed in Christ as a Savior found it hard to believe that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs in the Kingdom of Heaven. Therefore, the terms all men, the whole world, etc. Were used to break down this prejudice and to enforce the hope of the Gentiles in the Gospel.

Perhaps we have said enough in response to the letter of the sister. We have tried to write briefly, but plainly and in all kindness, and with regard for the truth to scriptures. It is sure. That all for whom Christ gave himself are freely justified and saved. No charge can ever again be urged against that man for whom Christ has died because God has justified him freely by his grace from all things from which he could not be justified by the law of Moses.

If our sister has felt the power of the atoning blood of Christ in her own experience, and we doubt not that she has. Then upon that account, as well as from the testimony of Scripture concerning the efficacy of his blood, she must know that in no case could that blood be shed in vain. But if Christ died for anybody who shall not finally be among his jewels. For that one, his blood was shed in vain. And if for one we may not be true for all. And what certainty is there of the final salvation of anyone? How can our sister rejoice in such an unfinished salvation as this?

We leave these reflections for the consideration of all who may read them, and trust that they may be blessed to the instruction of many of our Lord's people, as well as to our own sister herself.

Elder FA Chick
July 24, 1895, Editorial Signs of the Times