I am going to make this review as quick and to the point as possible. I just finished From Heaven He Came and Sought Her from Crossway. Before I get to what I disagree with I need to state that I have a lot of respect for the contributing authors and am grateful that the book has been written. I ascribe to definite atonement (and more) so naturally I was looking forward to reading and enjoying. While I did enjoy the book I have to say it did disappoint. So my goal of this post is to simply point out the biggest problem I see with the content of the book. Instead of focusing on the whole, I am going to look at the last chapter the book because it will allow me to use a couple quotes that I believe are consistent with the rest of the book. I will attempt to show the incompleteness of the arguments contained in the book as a whole.
“The term definite atonement refers to this truth-when God sent his Son to die, he had in view the definite acquisition of a group of undeserving sinners, whose faith and repentance he obtained by the blood of his Son. This is a divine purpose in the cross-to purchase and create the saving faith of a definite, freely chosen, unworthy, rebellious group of sinners.” pg 643
As someone who holds to definite atonement I would like to affirm the above quote as truth. In fact most of the people I know who hold to a reformed type soteriology would also affirm the truth contained in this quote. If that is the case then what is my problem with the content of the quote. My problem is that it does not take the extent of the atonement far enough. Many people who hold to definite atonement say “yes” to Jesus death for the elect, but want further and biblical answers to statements like this from John Piper “Whatever blessings flow to the world from the cross of Christ, and they are many, there was in its design a “Great Love” specifically intended to rescue “His Own”. pg 641 So my question to Piper and for the book is what are the many universal blessings that flow from the Cross of Christ to the world? From the statement above can we not say in some way then Christ in fact has died even for the non-elect? If universal benefits flow from the cross to the world it seems perfectly consistent to affirm dual purpose in the atonement. This is a problem throughout the book. Almost every chapter contains generalized statements about benefits that universally flow from the atonement to the world but then start to critique anyone who would try to answer the very questions that flow from the writers affirmations of universal benefits.
For some reason the contributers never seem to answer the question “What are the universal benefits that flow from the cross”? To those who would try to answer that question, all that we get is chapter after chapter arguments of Owen’s double payment and Trinitarian Unity. I am left wondering why the authors did not further elaborate on those who affirm Christ atonement for the elect specifically and Christ death for all generally. We are not all Hypothetical Universalist or Amyraldian. We agree with Owen and Trinitarian Unity we just try to biblicaly answer “What are the universal benefits to the world?” In my estimation the view expressed in the book truly does “Limit” the atonement.
Why does God “Make the sun rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust” Mt 5:45
Why does God “Have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord: so turn and live” Ezk 18:32
Why does God “Love the world” Jn 3:16
Why does God let any non-believer live another day?
Could it not be that those might be some of the “Universal Blessings” that Piper was talking about?
btw… The 2 Books I have read on the atonement are both by the same auther, George Smeaton. His books “Christ Doctrine of the Atonement” and “The Apostles Doctrine of the Atonement” are worth finding and reading. Jerry Bridges said about the ADOC that it is his favorite book on the atonement. I agree!!!
Leave a Reply