SUFFICIENT FOR ALL, EFFECTIVE FOR THE ELECT

1TIM.2:4   who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

1JOHN 2:2 and he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the
whole world(2889).

JOHN 1:29The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God,
who takes away the sin of the world (2889)!

JOHN 3:14-16 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be
lifted up, that whoever beleives in him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world(2889)
that he gave his only Son, that whoever beleives in him should not perish but have eternal life.

ROM. 5:18 Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of
righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men. [FROM THE GREEK INT. BY BERRY; so
then as by one offence [it was] towards all men to condemnation, so also by one accomplished
righteousness towards all men to justification of life. (i.e. available for.)]

JOHN 12:47 for I did not come to judge the world(2889) but to save the world(2889).

2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false
teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who
bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.

STRONGS DICTIONARY

2889. Kosmos; prob. from the base of 2865; orderly arangement, i.e. decoration; by impl. the
world (in a wide or narrow sense, includ. its inhab., lit. or fig. [mor.]:-adorning, world.

HEBREW GREEK KEY STUDY BIBLE
LEXICAL AIDS TO THE NEW TESTAMENT
SPIROS ZODHIATES

2889 Kosmos; world, cosmos from kosmeo(2885), to set in order, adorn. That which pertains to
space and not time (aion, 165, age). The sum total of the material universe, the beauty in it ; the
sum total of persons living in the world.

VINE'S EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY OF N.T. WORDS

I. KOSMOS, primarily order, arrangement, ornament, adornment (I Pet. 3:3, see ADORN, B), is
used to denote (a) the earth, e.g., Matt.13:35; John 21:25; Acts 17:24; Rom. 1:20 (probably here
the universe: it had this meaning among the Greeks, owing to the order observable in it); 1 Tim.
6:7; Heb. 4:3; 9:26; (b) the earth in contrast with Heaven, 1 John 3:17 (perhaps also Rom. 4:13);

THE CREEDS OF CHRISTENDOM.
PHILLIP SCHAFF
VOL.1 THE HISTORY OF THE CREEDS

PAGE 518 "Calvin himself says that Christ died sufficienter pro omnibus, efficaciter pro electis."
i.e. sufficient for all, effective for the elect.

VOL.3 THE EVANGELICAL PROTESTANT CREEDS

THE CANONS OF THE SYNOD OF DORT
SECOND HEAD OF DOCTRINE
OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST, AND THE REDEMTION OF MAN THEREBY.

ART.3 The death of the Son of God is the only and most perfect sacrifice and satisfaction for sin;
is of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world.

ART.5 Moreover the promise of the gospel is, that whosoever beleiveth in Christ crucified shall
not perish, but have everlasting life. This promise, together with the command to repent and
believe, ought to be declared and published to all nations, and to all persons promiscuously and
without distinction, to whom God out of his good pleasure sends the gospel.

ART.6 And, whereas many who are called by the gospel do not repent nor beleive in Christ, but
perish in unbelief; this is not owing to any defect or insufficiency in the sacrifice offerred by Christ
upon the cross, but is wholly to be imputed to themselves.

ART.8 For this was the sovereign counsel and most gracious will and purpose of God the Father,
that the quickening and saving efficacy of the most precious death of his Son should extend to all
the elect, for bestowing upon them alone the gift of justifying faith, thereby to bring them infallibly
to salvation: that is, it was the will of God, that Christ by the blood of the cross, whereby he
confirmed the new covenant, should effectually redeem out of every people, tribe, nation, and
language, all those, and those only, who were from eternity chosen to salvation, and given to him
by the Father; that he should confer upon them faith, which, together with all the other saving
gifts of the Holy Spirit, he purchased for them by his death; should purge them from all sin, both
origional and actual, whether committed before or after beleiving; and having faithfully preserved
them even to the end, should at last bring them free from every spot and blemish to the enjoyment
of glory in his own presence forever.

It should be pointed out here that the doctrines espoused by the Reformed Churches at the time of
the formulation of the Canons of the Synod of Dort, did not differ with Calvin. They beleived, as
clearly stated in the 3rd article that the death of Christ was "abundantly sufficient to expiate the
sins of the whole world", as also stated in many passages of the Word of God. They beleived, as
Calvin did also that this atonement was only effective for the elect, as stated in the 8th article, "all
those, and those only". They also believed that the elect were those "whosoever believeth in
Christ crucified shall not perish, but have everlasting life", as clearly put forth in Article 5 and in
the Holy Scriptures.

     As is abundantly clear in the Scriptures and in History, the truth gets distorted with time, either
by the machinations of Satan or by mans own folly, so let us now examine what time has done to
the most noble document drawn up at Dort in 1619.

        THE DEEPER FAITH:
        AN EXPOSITION OF THE CANONS OF THE SYNOD OF DORT
        GORDON GIROD

         PAGE 30
         LIMITED ATONEMENT
         Second Head of Doctrine: of the Death of Christ, and the Redemption of Man Thereby.

It will be pointed out here that Girod entitled the second head of doctrine "LIMITED
ATONEMENT", while the Canons do not have that heading.

       PAGE 35
            Calvinists, those who espouse the Reformed Faith, speak of the death of Christ as
        constituting a "Limited Atonement." You understand the word "atonement." When we
        speak of the death of Christ as an atonement for sin, we mean that the death of Christ
        upon the cross paid the price of sin. He atoned for, that is, He paid the price of our sin.
            When we say that His death was a limited atonement, we mean that He died for a
         limited number; we mean that His death atoned for a limited number; we mean that
         He paid the price of sin for a limited number.

The above quotation shows that the current teaching is that the death of Christ was NOT
"sufficient for all". It also indicates that Christs death paid the price for the elect, and only the
elect, whereas 2 Peter 2:1 is very clear "even denying the Lord who bought them". Modern
Calvanism says He didnt buy them, yet those who would deny the Lord can hardly be called
saved.

        PAGE 36
             Now, we have said that the Calvinists, the fathers of the Reformed Faith, gave
         this doctrine a name; they called it the "limited atonement."...
              And we shall not properly honor God the Father, nor Christ the Son, nor the Holy
         Spirit, unless we graciously hold this to be the teaching of the Word of God.

The gracious author obviously holds that one can not properly give due honor(worship) to God
unless he beleives in a doctrine which has no corresponding phrase within the Word of God, nor
even within the Canons from which it is supposed to come. If the reader will take the time to go
through, not only the Canons of the Synod of Dort, but also the Westminster Confession of Faith,
the Belgic Confession, and the Heidelberg Catechism they will not be able to find one usage of the
phrase "limited atonement", nor the concept or arguments espoused by the so called "reformed
churches" of today. If I may quote out of the concluding article of the Canons of the Synod of
Dort,
...Finally, this Synod exhorts all their brethren in the gospel of Christ to conduct themselves
piously and religiously in handling this doctrine, both in the universities and churches; to direct it,
as well in DISCOURSE as in WRITING, to the glory of the Divine name, to holiness of life, and
to the CONSOLATION of AFFLICTED souls; to REGULATE, by the SCRIPTURE, according
to the analogy of faith, NOT ONLY their sentiments, but also their LANGUAGE, and to
ABSTAIN from all those PHRASES which EXCEED the LIMITS NECESSARY to be observed
in ascertaining the GENUINE SENSE of the HOLY SCRIPTURES, and may furnish insolent
sophists with a JUST PRETEXT for violently assailing, or vilifying, the doctrine of the Reformed
Churches.(authors emphasis)

        PAGE 37
             If there were a single soul in all the ages for whom Christ died, but who was not
        saved, it would mean that the death of Christ had been a failure as far as that man is
        concerned. And since there are millions of unsaved in every generation, in fact, far
        more who are not reconciled to God than who are, it would mean that the death of
        Christ was more a failure than a success.
             To say that the death of Christ upon the cross is in any wise a failure is to
        dishonor that death.

I find it hard to disagree with the author on his final point. For if the Word of God states that "he
is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." If a
theological position is set forth that demands that this Scripture cannot mean what it says, then it
would be appropriate to quote Matthew 15:9 "in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines
the precepts of men."

        PAGE 37
             To say that Christ set out to save men by His death upon the cross, and then to
        say that He failed in even one instance is to cast a terrible aspersion upon the
        redemptive work of Christ
             Secondly, to say that Christ died for a single soul which has not been saved
        is to imply that God is not just. Therefore, we cannot beleive that God would
        allow His Son to pay the price of any man's sin and yet condemn that man.

The doctrines of Dort had little problem with such an argument. A careful study of their doctrines
will show that such an argument never came up. They stated it very simply in the 2nd head, 6th
article. "And, whereas many who are called by the gospel do not repent nor believe in Christ, but
perish in unbelief; this is not owing to any defect or insufficiency in the sacrifice offered by Christ
upon the cross, but is wholly to be imputed to themselves."

I will conclude by saying again that the reformed doctrines of the Synod of Dort and Westminster
were most noble in their application and spirit, but the twisted version that has been inherited by
the reformed churches of the 20th century is not the true gospel (i.e. good news) of the Lord
Jesus Christ and bears many similarities to todays cults. There is no more important doctrine than
the atonement provided on the cross by our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and this is what has
been attacked by modern day Calvinism, for if their doctrines are true you cannot say to a sinner
that "Christ died for your sins, Christ paid the price for your sins, repent of your sins". I would
beg to ask how would one go about preaching the "good news" that "Christ might have died for
your sins", this gospel does not bring joy but despair, for it is a false gospel, in opposition to the
Word of God, and to the Canons of the Synod of Dort from which it is "supposed" to have
sprang.

The Basics

The Call

What to do?

KentWilken@aol.com RachWilken@aol.com

Return to Main Menu