Equipping University

The doctrine of irresistible grace is easily understood and it all flows from the first tenet of the Calvinistic understanding of how man is saved. The Bible teaches that man is dead in sin and enslaved to a corrupt nature that does not want or seek God. Man is incapable of doing anything that is pleasing to God. Even though man is dead in his sins, he is, of course, still alive and very active in his or her rebellion. Therefore, being dead is not equivalent with inaction or passivity. Because he is dead in his sins and dead towards God, man must be raised to spiritual life (made alive by God, born again). This is all that irresistible grace means - man must be given life in order that He might (and will) choose Christ. Without this life-giving work by God, man remains dead and enslaved to sin. To be as plainly simple as possible, irresistible grace is about regeneration.

The doctrine of irresistible grace is easily understood and it all flows from the first tenet of the Calvinistic understanding of how man is saved. The Bible teaches that man is dead in sin and enslaved to a corrupt nature that does not want or seek God. Man is incapable of doing anything that is pleasing to God. Even though man is dead in his sins, he is, of course, still alive and very active in his or her rebellion. Therefore, being dead is not equivalent with inaction or passivity. Because he is dead in his sins and dead towards God, man must be raised to spiritual life (made alive by God, born again). This is all that irresistible grace means - man must be given life in order that He might (and will) choose Christ. Without this life-giving work by God, man remains dead and enslaved to sin. To be as plainly simple as possible, irresistible grace is about regeneration.

The question we seek to answer in this chapter is this: When Christ died on the cross, who did He intend to save? Did Jesus come to earth to die for every single person who ever has lived or ever will live? Or did Jesus die in order to save those chosen by the Father and given to the Son in eternity past? What was God's intent in Christ's work on the cross? The simplest way to ask the question is to ask, "For whom did Christ die?" The answer to this question lies in the discussion of the extent of Christ's atonement. The person who coined the term "limited atonement" might have been a theological genius, but he was a disaster when it comes to public relations. The very term "limited atonement" is often enough for some to close the discussion. However, suppose we alter the language just a bit and speak of "definite atonement." To disagree with a definite atonement is to put forth an "indefinite atonement." Some use the term "particular redemption." To disagree with this position, you must hold to an "unparticular redemption." This may be mere semantics but it is easy to see how easy it is to "poison the well" in theological discussions and sidetrack the discussion before it even begins. It is also important to state at the very beginning that this doctrine should never be used as a litmus test for orthodoxy or fellowship. Scripture never singles out this doctrine as one of major importance not is it the center of attention in any major biblical passage. Our knowledge and acceptance of this doctrine stems from exegetical and logical inferences made from passages of some other theological issue. A balanced perspective would say that this doctrine seems to be true based on honest and sincere exegesis and study in biblical and systematic theology.