For whom did Christ Die (part 7)

by Danny Pelichowski

The Nature and Extent of the Atonement (part5 conclusion)

In the introduction to John Owens The Death of Death in the Death of Christ Dr. Packer eloquently communicates God’s effective plan of salvation, “Three Persons working together in sovereign wisdom, power and love to achieve the salvation of a chosen people, the Father electing, the Son fulfilling the Father’s will by redeeming, the spirit executing the purpose of Father and Son by renewing."[17] The triune Godhead is unified in the plan of redemption. The four point Calvinists change the above quote to God elects some, Christ dies for all, and the spirit applies redemption to some. Therefore you have God the Father and God the Holy Spirit working for the elect and God the Son working for the whole world. This is a real problem because the Godhead cannot be in disunity whatsoever especially when it comes to the plan of salvation. Ware’s argument that the Bible specifically connects the atonement to the elect but does not directly leave out the non-elect fails to persuade me. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 4:6 “I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another.” If Dr. Ware’s “plain reading of the problem texts” are incorrect as I began to try to portray in the discussion of 1 Timothy 2:4 about the meaning of the words “all” and “world” then his logic about the above point would be going beyond what is written. Dr. Ware teaches hermeneutics and the principle that one must not always interpret a passage at face value. He even deals quite competently with this subject refuting open theists in his book God’s Lesser Glory. Dr. Ware states that “…it is apparent that the underlying issue in the interpretation of these Jeremiah texts, as with all the proposed ‘openness’ texts here considered, is whether Scripture gives us sufficient warrant for looking beyond the straightforward understanding of these texts in order to discern their intended meaning."[18] It is my argument that Scripture does indeed give us good and sufficient warrant to interpret these so-called problem anti-Calvinist texts in a way that takes into account these interpretive principles.

Good exegetical work and faithful Biblical interpretation takes into account the entire revelation found in Scripture as well as the passages of full mention on certain Biblical doctrines. It is my desire to continue to study these texts as well as the doctrine of the atonement in order to correctly understand the Bible. I am not naïve enough to think that this discussion has exhaustively dealt with the Calvinists problem texts however; I have started to scratch the surface on some very plausible if not accurate ways of interpreting them. I also realize that my understanding and critique of Dr. Ware’s position is not exhaustive in the least. This is just the beginning of what I hope to be a constant polishing and sharpening of my beliefs about the wondrous doctrine of the atonement. Above all, I desire to understand the truth and I will continue to study and marvel about the nature and extent of the atonement.

---

[17] Packer, J. I. Introduction to The Death of Death in the Death of Christ. P. 6

[18] Ware, Bruce Gods Lesser Glory P. 79