Definite Atonement

Zechariah Eshack: 0:00

Welcome to the Restless Theologian podcast, where we focus on having insightful conversations in biblical history and theology. I'm your host, Zechariah Eshack, for our seventh episode of season three. We are going to be discussing the doctrine of definite atonement. Did Christ die for all without exception or specifically for his elect? Episode of season three we are going to be discussing the doctrine of definite atonement. Did Christ die for all without exception or specifically for his elect? And to unpack this, today I have my good friend Cory Reckner back on. How are you doing, corey?

Cory Reckner: 0:35

Good, what's up Zech?

Zechariah Eshack: 0:37

Not a whole lot. Not a whole lot. Just been trying to get over this cold, and so if my voice sounds a little bit different today, that's why it's not somebody different.

Cory Reckner: 0:47

It's still Zech Eshack. It's not AI either. No, not at all.

Zechariah Eshack: 0:54

Now people are going to be wondering if it is AI, this whole thing is AI.

Zechariah Eshack: 0:58

Yeah, we're converting AI, so this one has been a very fascinating one to look into. Just spent a lot of time reading this book called From Heaven he Came and Sought Her, and it's by Jonathan Gibson and David Gibson Not sure if they're brothers or not, but each chapter is like a different theologian that does it, which is really cool. But the whole premise of the book is to look at the doctrine of definite atonement from like a historical standpoint, from a biblical standpoint, and I actually really loved it. It was a great book. I'm 500 pages through. Wow.

Zechariah Eshack: 1:39

It is 700 pages so it's been taking some time. It's actually a series with Crossway they're doing one on total depravity. I just got that book in the mail the other day. It's like 1100 pages or something. So I'm not a fast reader so that'll take me some time.

Zechariah Eshack: 1:56

But I really loved the book because I felt like it dived into a lot of the difficult passages in the New Testament, specifically around the atonement. And so for today, what we're going to look at is just the Trinitarian unity that is seen through the lens of definite atonement and just about the coherence, about the theological framework. And we're also going to take a look at the interpretations of terms like all and world, because these come into play when we're discussing the doctrine of atonement. So particularly those who hold that Christ died for all, when they look at it that way, a lot of times they think of it as being all without exception. And we'll look at that.

Zechariah Eshack: 2:49

And I think after unpacking all of this, I think we'll see that it's a little bit naive to read that that all means all without exception every time the term all is used. So I think that that was really important to bring up. And then the other thing too, is maybe looking at how Paul looks at things right, because how Paul like the world that he lives in, and just his background, how that kind of comes into play when he's using some of these terms. It First we're going to look at the Trinitarian framework of redemption and so, if you want to mind reading for me, if you want to run through some of these passages that support predestination, the atonement being accomplished, which is propitiation, and then also to its application.

Cory Reckner: 3:40

You got it. So the first one's Ephesians 1, verses 4 through 5. He chose us in him before the foundation of the world. Then there's John 6, 37. All that the Father gives me will come to me. John 6, 39. And for propitiation, matthew 1, verse 21,. Matthew 26, 28,. For this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. John 10, verses 14 through 15,. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me, and I know the Father. And I lay down my life for the sheep. John 10, verses 28 through 30,. I give them eternal life and they will never perish and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I and the Father are one. John 17, verse 9. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me.

Zechariah Eshack: 5:20

Okay, we'll take a break right there real quick. Okay, well, we'll take a break right there real quick.

Zechariah Eshack: 5:30

It was really hard to kind of dwindle down this list of passages that are in reference to the atonement. Like, once you look at definite atonement, it's hard not to see it in so many different places of the New Testament and even, obviously, precursors to it in the Old Testament and then particularly the book of Isaiah. So to kind of just unpack just the first two sections, the idea is that the Father predestined the people in Christ, because that's what Ephesians 1, 4 through 5 says. He chose us in him before the foundation of the world. So before the foundation was laid he chose us in Christ.

Zechariah Eshack: 6:05

There was some other theologians. I'm trying to think if it was, it might have been Karl Barth. Actually in the book that it's discussed with his view and I definitely disagreed with Karl Barth. With his view. He kind of held that like the elect isn't individual people, he kind of held that like the elect isn't individual people, the elect is just Christ and it's just by default that those who end up coming to Christ are elect in Christ. So that's the approach that he took. It's not that the individuals themselves were elect, it's just by, you know, necessary consequence.

Zechariah Eshack: 6:44

They are elect if they chose Christ or whatever. So, and then the next part that you kind of ran through was discussing the atonement, the accomplishment of it. So what I really liked about the book I read was just about looking at it from not only from a Trinitarian lens, but also to the fact that there's redemption predestined, you know, like before the foundation of the world, you know, the father's predestined redemption, and then there's redemption accomplished, which would be the son dying on the cross, and then there's the redemption applied, which is the Holy Spirit applying the benefits and the gifts obtained through Christ's sacrifice on the cross to the believer. You know, with that being said, I mean, if you wouldn't mind just going through for me, just knock out those last three verses when it comes to the spirit and regeneration. So the application of redemption.

Cory Reckner: 7:45

Yep. John 3, verses 7 through 8. Do not marvel that I said to you. You must be born again. The wind blows where it wishes and you hear it sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the spirit. Okay, second one, john 6, verse 63. It is the Spirit who gives life. The flesh is no help at all. And there's Romans 8, verse 30. And those whom he predestined, he also called, and those whom he called, he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Zechariah Eshack: 8:28

Okay, awesome. Thanks for reading all those. I know it's kind of a lot to go through. Yeah, all good though you know I think that that's the difficult part as a podcaster. I don't want to. You know, I've listened to other podcasts, right, and then sometimes they'll just sound like they're reading off of a you know a template the entire time and you're like. You know, I like making it a conversation, but I want to make sure that I bring in biblical support for what we're talking about.

Zechariah Eshack: 8:58

So sometimes it's hard to balance that. So Arthur Pink really summarizes this and we've talked about this before and when we discussed our episode on the Trinity. He kind of sums it up as being that the Father chose us, the Son died for us and the Spirit quickens us. So this view of definite atonement, I mean it's really a Trinitarian work right Because you can't allow any sort of. I mean it's really a Trinitarian work right Because you can't allow any sort of disjointedness between the Godhead. Because when you look at some of the other frameworks, such as Arminianism or hypothetical universalism, I think it does bring a lot of disjointed or disunity in the Godhead, such as the Father only elects some and then the Son dies for all and then the Spirit just calls some.

Cory Reckner: 9:47

So break it down a little bit more too with the Arminian view, like why would you say that that fractures that Trinitarian purpose there? What do you think about that?

Zechariah Eshack: 9:57

Well, I think it's the intent, right? Because here you have different purposes within the Godhead. So if the purpose of the father is only to elect some, but the purpose of the son is has a different purpose, right? Because his purpose isn't to redeem some, it's to redeem all.

Cory Reckner: 10:16

So you're saying already the father and the son are on two different pages.

Zechariah Eshack: 10:20

Right, because I think it's. There was a Reformed theologian that shortly came after John Calvin. He was within the Reformed tradition and he kind of held to more of the Synod of Dort and everything. Bit of the idea that. I think it was John Davinet is the guy's name, but he participated in the Synod of Dort. He was a British theologian and he definitely held to that. You know, christ died for all men, meaning that like he died for men, almost like it's for man's um, how do I want to word this? But like maybe man's nature, as in so since Christ became, christ became man in the incarnation and so, like his sacrifice on the cross, it is applicable to all men because it's like it's in his nature, he redeemed humanity as a whole.

Cory Reckner: 11:21

As a man, yeah, as a man, and.

Zechariah Eshack: 11:24

I would say that other theologians that kind of held that view. Seemed like they draw a little bit, knowingly or unknowingly, a little bit more from Athanasius Because I feel like St Athanasius for example. He kind of had a little bit more of that view. I haven't read a ton of Athanasius but the Orthodox really like St Athanasius Not like I dislike him. Obviously he defended the Trinity. Athanasius, he kind of held to that in Christ becoming man so that we could be made God. There's that little bit of so. The Orthodox would see theosis that's what they call almost like sanctification and unity with God, almost like a participation in God, like the.

Zechariah Eshack: 12:13

Godhead, and I'm very hesitant with you have some reservations. I have reservations about that view because it's like you don't want to confuse yourself with God. Sure, sure, and you have to be very careful about how that's worded. I think Like he became what we are so that we might become what he is you know there's that type of language in Athanasius a lot.

Zechariah Eshack: 12:40

Athanasius a lot. So I think when, uh, when, drawn from that, but back to John Davinet, so I think that he kind of um was definitely a proponent of more of that Christ died for all. He definitely believed in um, uh, election, obviously Christ, um, or that God the father elected a specific people, and but there was a theologian that came later called Amirat, but basically what he kind of held is that there's almost like two wills in a sense, even though he didn't word it that way, but almost like that. So Christ dies for all men, right. And since God the Father knows that not all men are going to come to him, there's a secondary reaction or response from God where he just chooses some. So the intent is to save all. Christ dies for all. But then, you know, having that foreknowledge, almost like that, not all men are going to come to him. It almost seems like that he's trying to say that there's going to be a contingency, right?

Cory Reckner: 13:45

So there's still like an unfulfillment.

Zechariah Eshack: 13:49

Yeah because, it almost seems like a reactionary thing, right? So? The intent is that it's for all men in scope and view here, but then knowing that that's not going to happen, or maybe a part of his will doesn't want it to happen, I don't know. But as an afterthought almost, that there's a secondary part of God's plan where it's like he just only elects some only chooses some Like plan A didn't work, so we're going to go with plan B, right, yeah, yeah.

Zechariah Eshack: 14:20

Yeah, I mean that's kind of in layman's terms. I mean obviously some of these theologians are going to be able to unpack it better than I would, but it was really interesting to think about. So I think that that naturally kind of leads us into kind of understanding the term all in world in Scripture.

Zechariah Eshack: 14:39

Yeah, where someone who holds Arminian views or even, without even knowing it, holding Arminian views, that it's very commonly understood within because I would say, augustinianism, calvinism, it's definitely more of the minority within Protestantism, right? So, with that being said, let's just look at some of the key passages about the terms all and world in scripture and how all doesn't always mean all without exception. So, for example, you have Luke two, verse one all the world should be taxed. Well, in that situation they're not really actually talking about the entire world.

Cory Reckner: 15:24

The whole world needs to be taxed, yeah.

Zechariah Eshack: 15:29

And then it means all under Rome, like that's the intent behind what's being said. And then Mark chapter one, verses five. All of Judea, for example, went out to see John the Baptist. Did all of Judea come out to see John the Baptist? Yes, they did. They all went out to see John the Baptist, did all of Judea come out to see John the Baptist.

Cory Reckner: 15:45

Yes, they did. They all went out to see John the Baptist, every single person.

Zechariah Eshack: 15:48

Do you see that there's a little bit of a? Nuance here, yep, right, and this was one I actually read a long time ago. So Augustine really kind of hones in on this too, because I feel like Augustine already, the way his mind works. He it's kind of like Paul, right, because Paul, in like Romans 9, he's already pre-planning to hear an argument from the other side right, kind of like a lawyer, yeah, yeah. Like his mind already naturally goes to like.

Zechariah Eshack: 16:17

I know this is how it's going to be interpreted, but how at face value? This is going to be wrong and I know that there's going to be people wrong about this. So 1 Corinthians 15, verses 22. So it says as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. So a natural result of that, a natural conclusion, would be that, okay, so all die, in Adam it's everybody. So all will be made alive in Christ. So, taking at face value, what would we think? That naturally leads to what?

Cory Reckner: 16:52

Yeah, at face value, it's like I guess you could. I'm sorry you could compare it to, like you know, a life-ending comet hitting the earth. Everyone dies, that's Adam. But then there's-ending comet hitting the earth everyone dies, that's Adam. But then there's another comet hits the earth, brings the entire earth back to normal. That's Christ right yeah. So it's like everything is universally taken care of because of Christ, right, yeah? Yeah, so Augustine in his letter to Hilarious. I don't know, maybe he was that's such a good name. Yeah, maybe he was Hilarious.

Zechariah Eshack: 17:28

He was a comedic theologian.

Cory Reckner: 17:30

Was he? No, I don't know. He should have been. Yeah, he wasn't.

Zechariah Eshack: 17:33

Right Now I kind of want to read some of Hilarious just to see.

Cory Reckner: 17:37

Yeah, really, he's actually funny Watch him be like super strict and super like Most serious theologian there ever was. No nonsense, he was not hilarious.

Zechariah Eshack: 17:47

He says basically okay. So Augustine, in his letter to him he says notice how he emphasizes one and one, that is Christ, and I'm sorry, that is Adam and Christ, the former for condemnation, the latter for justification. Obviously he's speaking of the resurrection of the just, where there is life eternal, not the resurrection of the wicked, where there will be eternal death. Those who shall be made alive are contrasted with those, with the others, who will be damned. In essence, what is being said here is if all means every person, then all are raised to eternal life, which naturally would result in universalism, which we know scripture does not teach, christ doesn't teach it, paul doesn't teach it. So when we see a passage like this and we know that there's other biblically sound arguments for something that sounds like it's against this, then obviously we have to look a little bit closer right, because even the Westminster Confession of Faith says you know, not everything is equally plain in the scriptures, but where it's spoken of more plainly in other passages, obviously it's supposed to shed light into the more complex ones.

Cory Reckner: 19:03

Yeah, yep, that makes sense too into the more complex ones.

Zechariah Eshack: 19:06

Yeah, so, yep, that makes sense too. Yeah, so a better interpretation would be you know, all in Adam means universal death, and then all those that are in Christ, all the elect, eternal life. So we'll kind of touch base on some of the other ones too. So 1 John 2, verse 2, where it says says he is a propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world, the whole world, right Like everybody, everyone, every single person every single person without exception.

Zechariah Eshack: 19:36

That's what people's most mind. That's where they're. They would naturally go.

Zechariah Eshack: 19:40

Right. So if the whole world means every person, then God's wrath is completely satisfied, which would naturally result in universalism. So you see, kind of like a trend here that if we have to take all without exception, every single time the term all is used, we run into a big problem. We naturally have to almost become universalist by default, that everyone's going to heaven and um. But so it's like, what do we make of the testimony of Paul and Jesus Christ? When they tell us about the lake of fire and, you know, about judgment, a good interpretation of this is that the whole world means not just the Jews but also the Gentiles.

Zechariah Eshack: 20:26

I think when you look at Paul, a huge part of Paul, like I think his background speaks a lot to this, because you know he was a Jew of Jews, where it's like you know he knew the law in and out, obviously, you know, and he attacked Christians and had them imprisoned or killed. And if you think about it that way, it's like if anyone knew Jewish elitism, it was him. And you notice that when I say Jewish elitism, what I'm basically saying is that these are God's chosen people. There's no one outside of this and it's not for the Gentile outside of this and it's not for the Gentile In here. It's like Paul time and time again, whether he's facing the Judaizers or someone else. A lot of times, this is why he uses the term all world. It's because he means all without distinction, not all without exception. So what are your thoughts on that? Have you looked at it that way before? Do you think that this is a more valid way of looking at it?

Cory Reckner: 21:29

Yes, yeah, it does seem like with a lot of these passages, like you mentioned, with all and world, there's a lot of linguistic playing going on here, like a lot of flexibility with these words, and what I mean by that is I just keep thinking of common everyday phrases. We might say say now, like if I were to talk to you and tell you something, and then say, well, everybody knows that. It's like does every single person know what I'm telling you?

Cory Reckner: 22:04

most of the time probably not, right yeah there's plenty of people that don't know, maybe, a certain something that I would find very familiar to myself and say, well, yeah, see, it's just like how the earth is round. Everybody knows that, and I'm saying that yeah, not everybody believes that right Not everybody does know that, Go down that conspiracy.

Zechariah Eshack: 22:25

Oh well, I didn't mean to do that. No, I'm just kidding.

Cory Reckner: 22:27

Let's open up the door now. But, yeah, so it seems like when Paul especially because you mentioned Paul and how he's phrasing to his Judaic audience a lot of times he's like making these reference points where he's referring to, like, the common known world, at the time he's like, well then, it's all, right, it's all, and it's this world that we live in, right, right, it's all, and it's this world that we live in, right. Another example, and I'm sorry if I'm jumping ahead, if you have this verse, but it's the world that's John 3, 17,. Right, right. Well, once again, how loose are we going to get with that? Because if we get really loose, we say, yeah, jesus literally saved absolutely everybody.

Cory Reckner: 23:26

But we could look at it from a reference point of saying who's being addressed here? Who is the author trying to target when they're speaking to people? Yeah, definitely sinners, right, because we're all sinners. But when it comes to all in world, especially, like I said, it really depends on the language that's at play in the instance here. So I would say each passage might be a little different with who they're actually trying to draw a reaction out of, but it does feel like if we were to interpret this, is it still the same today. You know meaning, like the application of these passages, like does God love the whole world right and has Christ just forgiven the whole world?

Cory Reckner: 24:15

Like don't need to do anything about it. It's just everything's good now you know, so I do think it's a lot of linguistic, um you know, wrestling going back and forth, yeah yeah, yeah, because from what I understand about hypothetical universalism.

Zechariah Eshack: 24:31

So the intent is universal, it's meant for all men, but the application is not for all men.

Zechariah Eshack: 24:37

intent is universal, it's meant for all men, but the application is not for all men. Yeah, so I actually bringing in kind of what you said with second Peter three, verses nine. This is another difficult passage, you know, obviously, like the one John 3, 16, you brought up about, how you know it's kind of all encompassing world. That's how it's been read. And then so second Peter three, 9,. It says the Lord not wishing any to perish, but that all should reach repentance. So if any means, every individual, god's will has not been accomplished, if his intent and purpose is to save all men, but not all men, as we know, will be saved, then we're in an unfortunate spot, right, because we have to say that God will something that he cannot bring to fruition it can't come to pass, which shows, and that already to refer back to what we were talking about originally that breaks something with that Trinitarian purpose already, because it shows that the Godhead has a will and it didn't happen. Yeah.

Cory Reckner: 25:38

And it probably won't ever happen completely.

Zechariah Eshack: 25:40

Yeah, and I know that some people make distinctions between, like the decretive will of God, for example, like in the 10 commandments. Obviously he wills that, like you shall not murder, shall not commit adultery. I mean that's part of his decretive will. As we know, people break his decretive will. That's what he decreed, but obviously people still break it. So it's like obviously the nuance that we could go into that. I'm not as studied up on about the different types of um, but I mean nevertheless, I mean when you look at it, uh, just from like the atonement standpoint, I mean you seem. I mean nevertheless, I mean when you look at it just from like the atonement standpoint, I mean you seem. I mean it seems you're hard pressed to find that like I don't know, I don't know how I would justify a position to be like, okay, god 100% wants and wills that every person be saved. He just can't bring it about.

Cory Reckner: 26:37

Right.

Zechariah Eshack: 26:38

Man's power, man's ability, man's will is too strong. He can't overcome or counteract it. Yeah.

Cory Reckner: 26:49

And I don't want to get off the tracks here, but no you're good. It reminds me a little bit of the difference between like law and then will you know, yeah, because in the Old Testament it's filled with God's law, but you see his will all over the place throughout the OT as well. And in the New Testament there's not as much law. You know that, we know of. Yeah.

Cory Reckner: 27:12

But you see the will of God all over the place and, as the Bible even says, jesus is like the manifestation of everything, god in a human form. And the will of God was to give himself for the sins of mankind Right. Right.

Cory Reckner: 27:28

So we see that there's this will, this purpose that God has, but that's a little different than a law. Right Like a law, anybody can break it right you mentioned the 10 commandments. All I can think of now is like a speed limit sign. Right, you got speed limit signs all over the place. Well, they were created by man, put into place and people break them all the time. Right, it's just how it is.

Cory Reckner: 27:50

That's normal for everybody yeah but that's different than like the intent behind the law. Right, right, the intent behind the law is okay. Well, why are we even making speed limit signs?

Zechariah Eshack: 28:01

We're making them because of people's safety you know, yeah, the government wills that you or wants that you don't break the law, but you still do. You still do, yeah.

Cory Reckner: 28:11

And sometimes I wonder if the government really doesn't want us to. But you know, that's fine. Another topic. I wonder if the government really doesn't want us to but you know, that's fine, another topic, but yeah, so with God, if God and I was thinking about this kind of preparing for our talk here. Yeah.

Cory Reckner: 28:28

So you've heard the three. Like I said, I don't want to get off track, but I wanted to bring this up. So you hear of those three O's. When it comes to God in theology there's omnipresent three O's. When it comes to God in theology there's omnipresent, which means God's everywhere, omniscient, which means he's all-knowing, and then omnipotent, which means he's all-powerful. So you think of those and you try to classify God that way and it's like okay, great. But then you think of like the wrathful side, right, yeah, and you're like, well, that's interesting. I mean that might show his all powerfulness, right, but does it necessarily relate to something else? And this is what I was thinking about. There's another O that I don't think throughout church history the church has kind of highlighted enough compared to those other O's. And it's omni-benevolent, right, he's all loving. Yeah.

Cory Reckner: 29:19

Right, because if he's all loving, that's pretty big, because that shows that if he has perfect love, cause the same John who wrote uh, he not only died for our sins but the sins of the whole world. He also said God is love, right, as we think of that. And then we think of this limited, definite atonement situation. I think a lot of people get kind of mixed up with.

Cory Reckner: 29:47

Well, if God did specifically choose people to be saved and he only died for them, that means he's not all loving, you know, it means that he's very minimally loving you know, and I think that's where this confusion happens too, and why I was talking about wills versus laws, is laws are sometimes put in place due to, you know, people's health and safety and all that, but it's not necessarily because of love, you know. Yeah. But love can be tied into a will 100 because of love, you know, yeah, but love can be tied into a will a hundred percent every time you know. Yeah. You'll find out too, I know, when you guys have your, your baby here. Yeah, the next year, which congrats again.

Cory Reckner: 30:27

Thank you, yeah for sure, when you guys have your baby though I mean it's amazing because we have three kids and each kid is always a little different but even when you have that first one, there is just this love that happens, you know, especially being a dad. You just see this baby arrive into the world and there's just this new feeling you get. I that's the only way I can describe it. It's like a new kind of a feeling where you're like, wow, I have never felt this much love before for anything, and that's comparable.

Zechariah Eshack: 30:58

I'd say to how God feels about people you know.

Cory Reckner: 31:02

So I think it's easy just to mix that up and say, well, god can't be all loving if he has a specific will in place for specific people you know. Yeah. So I don't know if you want to.

Zechariah Eshack: 31:14

No, I mean, I think that our response always to that question is always the same as Paul's and Roman's nine. You know who are you, old man, to talk back to God? Yeah Right, you know what I mean, even though we don't understand. Um, I, I also feel like those on the other side. They seem very dissatisfied with that response of, very dissatisfied with that response of hey, you know, god has this secret purpose and will and things that like. What is the passage?

Zechariah Eshack: 31:43

You know how unsearchable are his ways and ways past finding out and it's like well, I think a lot of people who are Calvinists are perfectly fine with that answer and we're perfectly satisfied with it. I think we're contented with that answer right, Since we belong to him and we're not in a position to question him on it. You know what I mean, so you know obviously. Paul again says well, what does molded say to its maker? You know why have you formed me like this? I wanted to bring up this passage actually not a passage, but a quote rather from John Owen limited atonement and definite atonement, like it, can get kind of confusing because definite atonement is another way of saying limited atonement. But there's also Arminians that believe in limited atonement, but it's limited in a different way. Where it's like from a Calvinist standpoint, limited atonement means it's limited, you know, obviously to the elect. Where it's like from an Arminian standpoint, his atonement, his death on the cross, only goes, can only take you so far, because it's like you have to bridge that gap by your faith.

Cory Reckner: 32:57

Yeah Right, still somewhat dependent on the person. Yeah, yeah.

Zechariah Eshack: 33:02

Salvation at the end of the day, is in man's hand, not God's, because according to them, christ's death on the cross was, it wasn't a saving act, it was. It just basically brought up the opportunity for salvation, where it's like someone who's consistently believes in definite atonement and the perfect work of the Trinity all working together is going to sit there and say well, no, it is a saving act and scripture says so. So here's John Owen. He says the father imposed his wrath due unto, and the son underwent punishment for, either all the sins of all men, which would be universalism.

Cory Reckner: 33:44

So all in all yeah.

Zechariah Eshack: 33:46

All the sins of some men, which would be definite atonement, or some of the sins of all men. So and then he says, and this is the truth, but if the first be the case, why are not all men free from the punishment due unto their sins? You answer because of unbelief. I ask is this unbelief a sin, or is it not? If it be, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or he did not. If he did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which he died? If he did not, then he did not die for all their sins. I mean, like I told you before, I mean I read that so many times. The first time I read it just because I was pretty blown away by it and it took me a little bit to understand what he's saying there.

Cory Reckner: 34:49

Yeah, there's the three situations there, all sins. Let's say it again, just because it's kind of confusing. So first one is universalism.

Zechariah Eshack: 34:59

Yeah, all the sins of all men.

Cory Reckner: 35:01

That's all the sins of all men. The second one is a definite or limited atonement all the sins of some men. And then the third one, some sins of all men. So, like the third one, like you said, is that example of the limited atonement, but it only goes so far.

Zechariah Eshack: 35:22

Yeah, Because what's basically being said then is that the argument John Owen is getting at here is he holds to, as I hold to that unbelief itself is a sin. And I think there's evidence enough in scripture to support that, especially from Paul. But then he's asking but if Christ died for all their sins and unbelief is a sin why does that still hinder them from salvation and eternal life with God?

Cory Reckner: 35:53

Right, right yeah. Yeah.

Cory Reckner: 35:56

Yeah, I feel like the first choice and the last choice are definitely the most popular among many, many people and sects and religions, because the second one I you know. Let me go so far as to say this I feel like the second one's very popular among cults too. I think cults say that, you know, their special group is the ones, they're the ones that are saved. But then there's also, like what I would say, the Bible and Jesus speak of, where it is true for true followers of Christ, right, like the true, like you said, the elect, right, the chosen. Yeah.

Cory Reckner: 36:37

Shout out to the show. You know just that.

Zechariah Eshack: 36:40

Don't do that, man, come on you never know, you might get endorsements. No, I mean, I've actually only seen like an episode of it. Oh really, and I actually I'm like I don't know People, we're talking about the shows now.

Cory Reckner: 37:01

Yeah, I mean, I feel like people are like either one side or the other on the camp. Yeah, usually that's how it goes, yeah like they love the show.

Zechariah Eshack: 37:04

Everyone's got to watch the show yeah other people are like oh, you know, people that produce the show or actors on the show believe x, y and and Z or there's some contradictions, or maybe not some contradictions, but some things in there that go against the Bible, and I'm like I'll reserve judgment for later, after I watch it. I'm taking it. You're a fan of the show.

Cory Reckner: 37:31

So we've yeah, we're up to date with it.

Zechariah Eshack: 37:33

We watched the whole thing yeah yeah.

Cory Reckner: 37:34

Okay, but yeah, I mean just even tying it to the idea of there are a chosen group right Like people, just don't like that idea. Yeah, they just don't like the idea that God would choose specific people, and it's funny. Let's look at the disciples alone. Right, there were 12, but Jesus specifically, it looked like he favored three of them, right. Yeah. And the other disciples were pretty ticked about that too. Yeah.

Cory Reckner: 38:02

You know. So I'm just saying I think it's easy to just assume our own expectations about God's choices and his will sometimes, and it offends people if God would do something differently than we would do. You know.

Zechariah Eshack: 38:18

Yeah, but I mean, he even goes as far as say you know, you did not choose me, but I chose you.

Cory Reckner: 38:22

Yeah, he said that. Yeah, he said that.

Zechariah Eshack: 38:25

And even if those who hold to hypothetical universalism. It was kind of funny. It's like even in that context he's still choosing somebody. It's like when I had a discussion with someone online and they were like she was commenting on the whole Jacob I've, I love these, all have.

Zechariah Eshack: 38:43

I hated passage that someone had posted and was like, and she was arguing with me a little bit about it, she was, she was nice, she was respectful and um, but one of the things I had brought up or she had mentioned, oh well, that actually means it's talking about nations, it's not talking about individual people. So they try to sideline the issue by saying, oh, you know, trying to be like oh, it's not really what you think it is. It's not God favoring one person over another, it's the. You know, the context is talking about nations. Esau and Jacob are representative of nations and it's like I mentioned to her. I said it's still not overall favorable to the Armenian position because who lives in nations? People? So you still have God favoring one group over another group.

Cory Reckner: 39:31

So Israel is the select nation still. Yeah. Yeah.

Zechariah Eshack: 39:35

And there's been a lot of. I think it's funny because this is really interesting timing, because I guess it's just I'm thinking about. It's like why now? Why is all this stuff? You know, everything was happening with Gaza and it's just there's all these questions that like what is the Christian's duty to Israel as a nation, and then how more of the dispensationalists look at the Jewish people, and obviously so it's like I'm, you know, I'm post-mill, so I probably view it very differently than they do. But it is interesting because I feel like there's not a lot of people that provide a good balance, right.

Cory Reckner: 40:12

Between the two different frames of mind you mean.

Zechariah Eshack: 40:15

Well, I guess the idea of like it's like as Americans and too as Christians, I feel like we're like being kind of forced to take sides in a situation where it's like I'm not entirely sure what the right answer is. Because it's like, well, from a religious standpoint, looking at the religions, like, obviously, as a christian, by default, we don't believe in the jewish position and the way in which it's understood. Now, when it's anti-christ well, yeah, well, I mean just the overall denial of christ, right, that's what I mean yeah, yeah yeah, no, you're right, and and it's like the same thing with islam.

Zechariah Eshack: 40:55

It's like well islam doesn't accept christ as king. But yeah, I mean I don't want to get too far down, right, and it's like the same thing with Islam. It's like, well, islam doesn't accept Christ as king, but yeah, I mean I don't want to get too far down. I just think it's kind of interesting that the timing for this because it's like I'm bringing up about Paul and how he saw about the elitism going on, so much so that he confronts Peter right, because he confronts Peter about how he was scared of the circumcision party and it's like he kind of drew back from, you know, I think, preaching the gospel to the Gentiles and you could tell me if that sounds accurate.

Zechariah Eshack: 41:27

I'm just going off of memory here, but it was something along those lines, right? And then Paul confronts him and goes out to the Gentiles and they don't have to follow all these specific Jewish laws right, yeah, yeah.

Cory Reckner: 41:40

I mean, he's pretty much calling them out saying- Like circumcision for one you know.

Cory Reckner: 41:44

Yeah, and he's also saying you're shying away from telling people, like, the whole truth, right, and then you're also living differently compared to what you're preaching, yeah, which that's pretty common among a lot of people. Um, it's easy to tell somebody to live a certain way and not do it yourself, yeah, but yeah, it's just, and with that culture especially, like that was definitely a huge thing, it was the, I mean, it's still huge. You know, you think about, like you talk about Palestine versus Israel right now and all of that. Or you've got, you know, russia versus Ukraine, all these big wars happening right now. There's India versus Pakistan. There's just all these big battles happening right now in our time. And you know, usually people that are very loyal to their nation are going to like, speak from that viewpoint and say, well, us first, right.

Zechariah Eshack: 42:31

Right.

Cory Reckner: 42:31

And I think that's what Paul is kind of trying to cut into Peter's heart about. He's like well, you say that, but you're not acting like it, Right. You're also like it's kind of like saying oh you know, tell people to do this certain thing, but yet you can't hold up to that yourself. So you're like setting, setting them up for failure, pretty much. You know. Yeah, Calling out the hypocrisy.

Zechariah Eshack: 42:52

Yep, I mean. Next, I want to move to, um, for the sake of time, just running through some of these, uh, proof texts, uh, for definite atonement, and then we'll end with a couple of quotes and kind of just kind of wrap it up there. But so, if you want to mind, um, maybe going through some of them for me, um, there's start off maybe with john 6, 37 verse.

Cory Reckner: 43:14

Uh, verses 37 through 39 sure okay all that the father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out, for I have come down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me, and this is the will of him who sent me that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.

Zechariah Eshack: 43:40

Yeah, see, that's great. Like that shows he's fulfilling the father's will in that there's an elect group that's being given to christ and that he shall lose none of them. And then, moving on to, uh, john 10 um, let's see there's. We'll go through verses 14 and 15 and then um verses 27 through 29, if you don't mind reading it for me sure 14 and 15 is uh says.

Cory Reckner: 44:04

I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father and I lay down my life for the sheep, and then 27 through 29, my sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me. I give them eternal life and they will never perish and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My father, who has given them to me, is greater than all and no one is able to snatch them out of the father's hand.

Zechariah Eshack: 44:39

Perfect, yeah, and I mean. So here you have Christ basically saying you know that who he's laying down his life for, it's his sheep, and yeah, and just that, they're eternally secure you know, he says no one will be able to snatch them out of the father's hand.

Zechariah Eshack: 44:56

And he says no one will be able to snatch them out of my hand or the father's hand. I mean showing their security, security. And I think it's interesting when Christ uses the term sheep, because it kind of makes me think back to another passage where when he's confronting the Pharisees and one of the things he says to them about, he says you know, you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep hear my voice. And it's kind of funny because it's not that they don't believe because they're not as smart as somebody else. It's not that they don't believe because they're not as smart as somebody else. It's not that they don't believe because they haven't seen enough proof. I mean, they saw miracles, just like the other people saw the miracles. But he says explicitly that they do not believe because they are not his sheep.

Cory Reckner: 45:42

He also calls them children of the devil.

Zechariah Eshack: 45:44

Yeah.

Cory Reckner: 45:46

Pretty definite there.

Zechariah Eshack: 45:47

Yeah, pretty harsh. Also, in his high priestly prayer, christ makes a clear distinction. He says I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those who you have given to me, for they are yours. So he's explicitly saying you know, I'm not praying for the world as a whole, I'm not praying for every single individual. I'm praying for those in the world whom you have given me.

Zechariah Eshack: 46:14

Then Matthew 1, 21,. It says this directly involves the atonement. It says she will bear a son and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins. Right, and that's ultimately what it boils down to. Right, because those on the other side that hold more of like that Christ, um, that his atonement on the cross was for every single person then they have to explain as to why not every person is saved. But it's like, as someone who's a Calvinist, we can sit there and say, and those too, like some people that are I mean, I think that the Thomists probably hold kind of a similar view yeah, yeah, explicitly saying that he's going to save his people, rather than saying, you know, I'm going to save everyone.

Cory Reckner: 47:03

Yeah, I'm here to save all of you, like everyone in the world.

Zechariah Eshack: 47:05

Yeah, to save everyone. Yeah, I'm here to save all of you, like everyone in the world. Yeah, and then also too, I think another thing that really highlights this is the book of Revelation. Right, there's a passage in there and RC Sproul has brought this up and I thought it was a great passage that directly applies. He says let's see, this is Revelation, chapter five, verses nine, or verse nine. It says and they sang a a new song saying worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain and by your blood you ransomed people for god, from every tribe and language and people and nation. Notice what he doesn't say. He doesn't say you have ransomed all people from every tribe, every nation, every tongue. No, he says you ransomed all people from every tribe, every nation, every tongue. No, he says you ransomed the people from every tribe and language and people and nation.

Cory Reckner: 47:52

Specific people yeah, out of.

Zechariah Eshack: 47:55

So there's that, all without distinction, because it's not specific nations, it's not specific tongues, not specific tribes. So it's all without distinction, not all without exception, not specific tribes. So it's all without distinction, not all without exception. And then, lastly, if you wouldn't mind reading Ephesians 5, verse 25, for me.

Cory Reckner: 48:17

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.

Zechariah Eshack: 48:24

Yeah, so you see, you know Christ's love for his sheep, his bride. I mean there's a lot of different um symbols that scriptures use to kind of just show how intertwined they are. Right, you know, like us being the body, christ being the head, and just that sort of unity in Christ. But yeah, that's, that's the. Was there anything you wanted to touch on with that?

Cory Reckner: 48:49

No, that's all good, no.

Zechariah Eshack: 48:51

Okay, and then um, so I also wanted to bring in Warfield a little bit. He's got a really great book called the plan of salvation. It's only like a hundred pages but basically it's a um, it's uh, a lecture series that I think he gave to his students. I highly recommend it to anybody. It is very complex, it's kind of a difficult read. But I also think he unpacks the different theological frameworks and you kind of see how other denominations view salvation and how it's accomplished.

Zechariah Eshack: 49:26

Other denominations view salvation and how it's accomplished. But on hypothetical universalism he says the precise point is whether Christ's work actually saves those for whom it is wrought or only opens a possibility. The hypothetical universalist speaks of it as an opening. The way the consistent particularist insists it's a saving act that actually saves those for whom it is wrought, right. So I like the book of Isaiah.

Zechariah Eshack: 49:52

Um, there was a whole chapter on the book of like um, a couple of the chapters in Isaiah. With the book I read um from heaven he came and sought her and what I thought was really fascinating was that um, he brings up and highlights. That was that he brings up and highlights that Isaiah discusses not only that salvation and that the worship of God is going to be brought out to all nations and the spreading out to basically many, and also, too, about how Christ's death on the cross, how it actually secures belief. So it's like belief is something that is obtained by Christ and then obviously it's applied as a gift of God through the Spirit, and I thought that that was really cool how he looked at that, and then let's see. Lastly, I wanted you to see if you can read that John Knox quote for me. We'll kind of wrap it up there and kind of just briefly discuss it.

Cory Reckner: 50:56

Yeah, it says. The general consent of that sect is that God has no assured election or reprobation. Every man may elect or reprobate himself by his own free will forged by their own brains. Pelagius, thank you, but are the rotten heresies of Pelagius, long ago confuted by Augustine?

Zechariah Eshack: 51:21

So I did. When I looked up that quote, it says it's John Knox says it, and then I've read other things that said it's misattributed to him either way. I I didn't research it enough to know for 100% sure, but I thought it was, the information was relevant enough that, no matter who says it, I feel like it still applies, because those that Arminians, for example, like some of them, believe that in eternal security and then some don't, but like those people that believe that a person can be saved one day and then not saved another, you know, I think the point Knox is getting at here is that, you know, it's kind of a ludicrous claim to think that a man can elect or reprobate himself back and forth. Right, because then it would show that God has no sure election or reprobation and it's just that election is immutable because I think it flows from God and his purpose. Would you say that that's fair?

Cory Reckner: 52:28

Yeah, yeah, for sure. It also kind of reminds me of just what we were talking about with God's plan originally. Yeah. Like, if man can thwart that at all and ruin it, then it almost kind of seems like maybe it's not fully a divine, perfect plan.

Zechariah Eshack: 52:51

You know yeah, it's almost like he has contingencies in case x, y or z happens with somebody yeah, which makes yeah, sorry, no, no, you're good.

Cory Reckner: 53:00

No, I was just gonna say which yeah. With exactly that, and because mankind creates things that dwindle, it reminds me of well, it almost kind of seems like it's a man-made plan yeah, rather than a divine plan right you know, because what man creates will always go away and it's weak. But what god creates is, you know, perfect, and if he has a divine perfect will, that can't be destroyed, it can't be broken. Yeah, it can't.

Zechariah Eshack: 53:30

By man. Right, yeah, it can't falter, it can't fail to come to pass, Because then you would be questioning some of God's attributes that he says about himself and I think for me personally it just feels like I take what the scriptures say, that you know he came to save sinners and I believe that you know Christ when he died on the cross, it was a saving act. It just didn't open up, it didn't just remove some barrier for people to be able to Like.

Zechariah Eshack: 54:02

enter in yeah, enter in to like, I think, the definite atonement idea. I think is the most consistent Once I looked at it, the way the book presents it as a theological framework within the triune God and about how they're always. Even though there's certain things each one does, they're not working solely by themselves, where all members of the Godhead are participating in some way. Yeah.

Zechariah Eshack: 54:32

You know whether it's like God, the Father planning it, planning redemption. You know the Son obtaining redemption and then the Spirit applying that redemption. So yeah, I just wanted to go through that.

Cory Reckner: 54:57

And was there anything else you wanted to say before we wrap up? That the cross is, you know, not sufficient enough for them and that's why they question their salvation right yeah but the way he put it was he said but god invested way too much into that moment throughout all of history to just, you know, claim oh, it didn't really matter that much after all for it to not be effective forever, you know and that's.

Cory Reckner: 55:25

I thought that was pretty, pretty profound, because it, you know, there are times where I struggle, maybe, with faith, or, you know, thinking I'm not good enough or whatever. And just remembering that quote alone, really it stands out to me and it helps me, it assures me, because it's true, it's like if we count on god more than we can count on ourself, then we have so much more to rely on Right, and especially that moment because, like you said, with the Trinity working together, this divine plan of the cross, where it intersects humanity with God and saving grace, like it's such a momentous historical event that you can tell God put everything into that right, so for it to just be kind of feeble and not apply, you know, for our eternal security, I just feel like it might not be. You know, overall perfect, you know, and I think that that can't be true if we're talking about a perfect God. You know, overall perfect, you know, and I think that that can't be true if we're talking about a perfect God. Yeah, you know.

Zechariah Eshack: 56:29

No, I totally agree. Well, thanks, corey. Yeah, just, obviously, key takeaways is, you know, like I said before, the unity within the Trinity, I think can be seen in definite atonement and I think, if anyone's interested in learning more about it, you know it's a great book. It's called From Heaven he Came and Sought Her, by David Gibson and Jonathan Gibson, and then JI Packer actually gives the foreword. And, yeah, thanks for being here, corey.

Zechariah Eshack: 57:00

You know, if anyone wants to find out more resources, references, any sort of summaries of any of the episodes, they can go to my website at therestlesstheologian. com. You can reach me at zach@therestlesstheologian. com. So that's Zech Z-E-C-H at therestlesstheologiancom. I'd love to hear from anybody Um. You know, if you have um, uh, anything you would like to discuss or any questions, you know we can always bring them up on the uh, on the podcast episode and uh, you know I look forward to hearing from you. Uh, thanks again, Cory. I, I know we kind of rushed through a little bit of it, but trying to be mindful of your time, and you know, appreciate you here being you to be mindful of your time and you know appreciate you here being, you know being with me to discuss this.

Cory Reckner: 57:47

Yeah, no problem, Zech, thanks for having me again Appreciate it.

Zechariah Eshack: 57:53

Yeah, no problem.

Scripture:

• Ephesians 1:4–5

• John 6:37–39, 63

• John 10:11, 14–15, 27–29

• John 17:9

• Matthew 1:21, 26:28

• Romans 8:30

• 1 Corinthians 15:22

• 1 John 2:2

• 2 Peter 3:9

• Revelation 5:9

• Isaiah 42:6, 49:6, 53:11, 56:6–7, 60:3, 66:18–19

Creeds & Confessions:

• Westminster Confession of Faith

• Synod of Dort Canons

Theologians & Works:

• John Owen – The Death of Death in the Death of Christ

• B.B. Warfield – The Plan of Salvation

• Augustine – Letter to Hilarius (on 1 Cor. 15:22)

• Arthur Pink – The Sovereignty of God

• Jonathan Gibson & David Gibson (eds.) – From Heaven He Came and Sought Her

• J.I. Packer – Foreword to From Heaven He Came and Sought Her

1. What does “definite atonement” mean?

   It means Christ’s death was intended to actually secure salvation for the elect, not just make salvation possible for all.

2. Why does Paul use “all” and “world” language?

   Often to combat Jewish elitism, showing that salvation is for all kinds of people—Jew and Gentile alike—not every individual universally.

3. Doesn’t 1 Corinthians 15:22 teach universalism?

   No. Augustine explained that “all in Adam” means universal death, while “all in Christ” refers to the elect united to Christ.

4. How does definite atonement preserve Trinitarian unity?

   The Father elects, the Son redeems, and the Spirit applies salvation to the same group—the elect. Other views fracture this harmony.

5. Why does this doctrine give assurance?

   Because Christ’s death didn’t merely create a possibility. He truly purchased redemption for His people, guaranteeing that none will be lost (John 6:39).

Books:

• From Heaven He Came and Sought Her (Jonathan & David Gibson, eds.)

• The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (John Owen)

• The Plan of Salvation (B.B. Warfield)

• The Sovereignty of God (Arthur Pink)

• Institutes of the Christian Religion (John Calvin, esp. Book II)

Primary Sources:

• Augustine – Letter to Hilarius

• Westminster Confession of Faith (esp. on the atonement)

• Synod of Dort Canons

Videos & Sermons:

• R.C. Sproul – “Definite Atonement” lecture series

• Sinclair Ferguson on the cross and definite atonement

• Bible Project – “Day of Atonement”