The word "atonement" gets tossed around quite a bit in church circles, but it really isn't a word that should be associated within the context of the New Covenant. It was something more prevalent within the previous and now obsolete covenant the Jewish people were in before the cross.

Atonement represented a covering that included a priesthood involving many repeated sacrifices that ultimately could not take away sins. It was a covering, and it was temporary. The blood of Jesus was shed once and took sins away forever ... to be remembered no more by God. When people today debate whether we have an unlimited atonement (or not) is simply displaying a lack of knowledge regarding the *eternal redemption* which came through Jesus Christ.

Most of the corporate Christian church world has been stuck somewhere in-between these two very different covenants, making it harder for than it needs to be and putting unnecessary fear and pressure on themselves and others.

--Available on Amazon - "Clash of The Covenants: Escaping Religious Bondage Through the Grace Guarantee" https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0713ZSKY7