The Bible seems to give conflicting reports about what
has been done for us regarding our state before God. Did Jesus Christ die for
our sins individually, or did He die to put sin itself away? What I’m asking
is, did our Lord atone for only some sins and not for others, or did He pay for
all sins for all people, past, present and future, and therefore pay for sin
(singular)?
If we agree to the former there are two very popular
theologies. First is Falling Away, which many Christian churches, pastors and colleges
teach. This is that you have been saved and cleansed of former sins, but
present sins are another matter, and one can sin their way out of God’s grace,
grasp and forgiveness. Since the Bible does not address how many, or what type
of, sins one must perform to hazard this perilous end we must apply our own
measure of what sinning our way out of eternal life must look like. None of the
apostles or our Lord gave warning as to how far is too far, and when divine
grace is offended to the point that one slips through the cracks. More on this
later.
The second teaching is embraced by Calvinists. It states
that Christ only paid for the sins of some elect people, while others
(primarily the majority of mankind) were left reprobate and destined for Hell because
Jesus did not pay for their sins. In this instance one could definitely not say
that our Lord died for sin, to put it away by the sacrifice of Himself, but
that He died to save certain sinners and only to put their sins away. But is
this what the Bible teaches about sin? Is this the message conveyed throughout
the New Testament concerning the atoning sacrifice of our Savior?
Since we know from the New Testament that Jesus is our
great High Priest and that He has entered on our behalf into the Holy of Holies
we find in Him a depiction of the priest’s duties on the Day of Atonement;
perhaps the most solemn day of Israel’s history. Our journey begins in the book
of Leviticus. We find that the high priest during the Day of Atonement would
come bearing a bull for himself and his house, a goat for the nation of Israel,
and a scapegoat. The former two would be sacrificed and their blood sprinkled
on the mercy seat, while the scapegoat served a unique purpose: “Aaron
shall lay both his hands on the live goat, confess over it all the iniquities
of the children of Israel, and all their transgression, concerning all their
sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and shall send it away into the
wilderness by the hand of a suitable man. The goat shall bear on itself all
their iniquities to an uninhabited land; and he shall release the goat in the
wilderness,” Leviticus 16:21-22.
As for the two animals already mentioned, we learn what
their purpose was: “The bull for the sin offering and the goat for the sin offering, whose
blood was brought in to make atonement in the Holy Place, shall be carried
outside the camp,” Leviticus 16:27. The Hebrew word for atonement
literally means “covering”. In these passages then we are presented with a
twofold image. We have the blood of the sacrifice covering one’s sin on their
behalf; also, we have the scapegoat receiving the totality of Israel’s sins,
transferring them vicariously as it were to this animal which is then released
into the wilderness, where it is never seen again. In both of these images we
see the accomplished work of Jesus Christ.
One may argue that the perpetuating nature of these
sacrifices did not account for future sins, since these sacrifices repeat.
True. In ancient Israel they were perpetuated many times over, and the writer
of Hebrews tells us why: “But in those sacrifices there is a reminder
of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats
could take away sin,” Hebrews 10:3-4. In other words the blood of bulls
and goats sacrificed on the Day of Atonement only covered the sins committed
prior to Christ, anticipating the time when Jesus would come as a perfect
sacrifice and put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
The singular nature of Jesus’ sacrifice was meant as the
perfect sin offering that would remove not the sins of just Israel, but the sin
of the entire world, John 1:29; Isaiah 49:6. The language of Hebrews leads us
along the road that follows the Son’s death, sin’s demise, and Christ’s
resurrection that demonstrated God had accepted the Son’s payment for sin, and
that anyone whose faith was placed in Him would receive eternal life.
I John 2:2 declares, "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." That alone makes the Calvinist position untenable.
ReplyDeleteArthur Pink spent a large chunk of his book, The Sovereignty of God attempting to show how that verse didn't mean what it said. It was a chilling read. I was a little concerned about this series of posts because I wondered if some might think I was splitting hairs; which was not my intent. Yet I felt led to do it regardless, so I just pray it reaches whomever God wishes it to.
ReplyDelete