Welcome back. Today we're going to talk about the contentious debate over a limited

atonement by asking the question for whom did Christ die for? What is the extent of

his atoning work? Did he die for the elect only? Or did he die for every human who would

ever live? In other words, was the atoning death of Christ limited or was it unlimited?

So we have this question from Vincent in Japan. Hello, Pastor John. As you know, Calvinists

slash reformed theologians major on the theme of God's glory. So my question is how does

limited atonement make much of the majesty of Jesus when it is called limited? I understand

that we send against an infinitely holy God and therefore need an infinite atoning sacrifice.

How is this reconciled with the doctrine of limited atonement? Isn't an unlimited atonement

more profoundly glorious?

Well, let's start with a celebration of an amazing book published three years ago called

from heaven he came and sought her definite atonement in historical, biblical, theological and

pastoral perspective. 23 essays all answering that question. So I would hope that our

questioner would go and find the book. So Vincent, look it up. It is really worth the effort.

So you can see what the editors of that book did. They did not use the word limited atonement.

They used the word the phrase definite atonement not limited because Vincent is right that on the

face of it limited atonement sounds like God is held back limited in some way from doing the

really great thing. But in fact both sides in this debate limit the atonement only in different

ways. And the question is when they're both said and done is the definite atonement a more glorious

act than the one supported by unlimited atonement. So let's start with a definition of atonement.

I don't assume that everybody knows even that word. The atonement is the work of God in Christ

through Christ's obedience and death and resurrection by which he cancelled the debt of our sin

...