Unlimited Atonement is Double Punishment

I am going to piggy back off of Adam’s post on the doctrine of Limited Atonement. Do you realize that if you say the cross was not limited in its power and yet say that the Spirit of God didn’t save those for whom it was supplied, than you are saying that God didn’t consider the substitutionary death of His Son as enough to save sinners? To put it another way, by saying Christ died for those who will end up in Hell you are saying that the Father chose to punish the Son of God in their place and required an eternal punishment for them even though Christ supposedly took their punishment! If Christ bore the wrath of God in the place of sinners than those sinners will not face the wrath of God on judgment day. If Christ drank the cup of wrath reserved for those who will ultimately end up in Hell, than why does God pour out His wrath on them eternally?

When you say that Christ’s death on the cross was for those who will end up in Hell, you are saying that God was not satisfied with crushing His only Son in there place and thus you devalue and defame the saving work of God on the cross. It is a smack in the face to God to say that God didn’t empty His wrath against sinners on Christ at His death and that there was still wrath stored up for them. Do you not realize that Christ was in agony before going to the cross precisely because He was to drink to the dregs the full cup of God’s wrath against sinners? Imagine the anguish of knowing that all of your sins are hanging over your head and that you are going to face a just and holy God who will crush you to no end for such sins. Now picture Christ bearing the full weight of sins of every person who would believe on the cross and satisfying (quenching, absorbing like a spunge) the wrath of God against those sins. How can you say that such a work that Christ did in the place of sinners was not enough to bring them to saving faith? How can you say that God would not save those for whom He satisfied His wrath on His Son?

Is it not true that Christ’s death on the cross for sinners bought for us the steadfast love of God? Is it not true that Christ’s death on the cross bought for sinners an eternal right standing with God and accomplished the only means by which God would be pleased with them and reckon them righteous? Please consider the full teaching of God’s Word and you will see that God was fully satisfied with His Son’s death because it accomplished all that man could never accomplish to make him right with God. Isaiah says Christ was “stricken for the transgression of my (God’s) people”. Matthew records the angel declaring to Joseph that Jesus would be so named because He would “save His people from their sins”. Not make salvation possible, but actually save them.

The doctrine of limited atonement is merely the teaching that God was satisfied in His Son’s death on the cross in the place of sinners. Now those who believe in the Son to eternal life will not spend eternity bearing the wrath of God because Christ bore it for them.

 

“Man of Sorrows!” what a name
For the Son of God, who came
Ruined sinners to reclaim.
Hallelujah! What a Savior!

Bearing shame and scoffing rude,
In my place condemned He stood;
Sealed my pardon with His blood.
Hallelujah! What a Savior!

Guilty, vile, and helpless we;
Spotless Lamb of God was He;
“Full atonement!” can it be?
Hallelujah! What a Savior!

Lifted up was He to die;
“It is finished!” was His cry;
Now in Heav’n exalted high.
Hallelujah! What a Savior!

When He comes, our glorious King,
All His ransomed home to bring,
Then anew His song we’ll sing:
Hallelujah! What a Savior!