When we think about what Christ accomplished on the cross we really have three options.

One option is that Jesus died in the place of every single person. This would, then, mean that either Christ failed in his intended plan (because some are in hell) or that every single person is actually saved (universalism).

The second option is that when Christ died on the cross he died to make every person savable. He doesn’t actually accomplish the salvation of anyone but he opens up the way for men to be saved by grace when they repent and believe the gospel.

The third option is that “Jesus died as a substitute to secure the salvation of particular people.” (Proof, 38) The blood of Christ was sufficient to save the soul of every person that has ever lived—but God’s plan for His blood was to purchase a particular people as the bride of Christ.

The doctrine of Limited atonement is just a terribly worded way of saying you believe the third option to be the most biblical. You believe that

…Christ’s propitation on the cross is unlimited in its sufficiency or value. In this sense Christ makes an atonement for the whole world. But the efficacy of the atonement does not apply to the whole world, nor does its ultimate design. (Sproul, 177)

So, if you believe that Christ, at least in some sense, did not die for the entire world what then of proclaiming the gospel? Can you plead with sinners and tell them to come to Christ if it is possible that “the efficacy of the atonement does not apply” to them?

John Newton’s Answer

It is without doubt that Newton would have embraced the third option above. That fact is indisputable when assessing the life of a young John Newton. One can see this in his sermon on The Lamb of God, the great Atonement. Here Newton answers the question directly and obviously sides with our third option.

Some have attempted to show that Newton softened in his later days and no longer taught limited atonement. While it is true that Newton became less rigid in nailing down minute arguments, it is untrue that he moved away from a belief in particular redemption. Even as late as 1794 Newton pointed the Hannah More to this particular sermon to explain his views on the subject.

So Newton clearly held to a belief in particular redemption. But what did he do with our question? Did he believe that one who held to limited atonement could still preach directly to sinners?

Absolutely. While going to great lengths to show that Christ died for “His sheep” he also says this:

“That there is an election of grace, we are plainly taught; yet it is not said, ‘Jesus Christ came into the world to save the elect’, but that ‘he came to save sinners,’ to ‘seek and to save them that are lost’” (Volume 4, 192)

And it was because of this that Newton would say that ministers have a grounds to preach the gospel to every man—and to even directly address his conscience and even command them to “apply to Jesus Christ for salvation”.

How?

But isn’t this inconsistent? How can Newton say that Christ died for particular people and then say that we must share the gospel indiscriminately? Isn’t that a dishonest offer?

Christ died for particular people. Share the gospel with everyone. To some these two things cannot fit together and so they’ve attempted to do work on one of the two parts to the equation.

Some will deny the first statement and say that Christ died to make men savable, therefore we share the gospel with every man so that some can be saved.

Some will deny the second statement and say that because Christ only died for particular people we have no warrant to address the unconverted, we should only preach the gospel and tell them of their estate and a way of escape, but we should not address them directly.

But Newton saw a desire to be too consistent as the problem. We should affirm both statements because Scripture does. As Newton said, “we need not wish to be more consistent than the inspired writers nor be afraid of speaking as they have spoken before us” (Volume 1, 179).

You can believe wholeheartedly in limited atonement (particular redemption) and still persuade sinners to come to Christ. If you see historical figures like Newton pleading with all sinners to come to Christ, you do not have warrant to believe that such a one did not believe in limited atonement (as here).

A belief in limited atonement does not make you unable to proclaim the gospel directly to every sinner. In fact if taken whole such a doctrine may actually give you more confidence in proclaiming—knowing that His sheep will indeed answer the gospel call.

Regardless of our view on the extent of the atonement, may we go and preach the life-changing gospel of Jesus into all the world.

—

Photo source: here