Brown:

§ 2. The love of God to the world the origin of the plan of salvation.

There is another idea to which I wish for a little to turn your attention on this part of the subject. The love in which the economy of salvation originates, is love to the world. “God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son.” The term “world,” is here just equivalent to mankind. It seems to be used by our Lord with a reference to the very limited and exclusive views of the Jews. They thought God loved them, and hated all the other nations of mankind. These were their own feelings, and they foolishly thought that God was altogether such an one as themselves. They accordingly expected that the Messiah was to come to deliver Israel, and to punish and destroy the other nations of the earth. But “God’s ways were not their ways, nor his thoughts their thoughts. As the heavens are high above the earth, so were his ways above their ways, and his thoughts above their thoughts.”⁸⁷

Some have supposed that the word “world” here, is descriptive, not of mankind generally, but of the whole of a particular class, that portion of mankind who, according to the Divine purpose of mercy, shall ultimately become partakers of the salvation of Christ. But this is to give to the term a meaning altogether unwarranted by the usage of Scripture. There can be no doubt in the mind of a person who understands the doctrine of personal election, that those who are actually saved are the objects of a special love on the part of God; and that the oblation of the Savior had a special design in reference to them. But there can be as little doubt, that the atonement of Christ has a general reference to mankind at large; and that it was intended as a display of love on the part of God to our guilty race. Not merely was the atonement offered by Christ Jesus sufficient for the salvation of the whole world, but it was intended and fitted to remove out of the way of the salvation of sinners generally, every bar which the perfections of the Divine moral character, and the principles of the Divine moral government, presented. Without that atonement, no sinner could have been pardoned in consistency with justice. In consequence of that atonement, every sinner may be, and if he believe in Jesus certainly shall be, pardoned and saved. Through the medium of this atonement, the Divine Being is revealed to sinners, indiscriminately, as gracious and ready to forgive; and the invitations and promises warranting men to confide in Christ for salvation, are addressed to all, and are true and applicable to all without exception or restriction. The revelation of mercy made in the Gospel, refers to men as sinners, not as elect sinners. Their election, or their non-election, is something of which, when called on to believe the Gospel, they are necessarily entirely ignorant, and with which they have nothing to do. ” The kindness and love of God toward man,” the Divine philanthropy, is revealed. “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself” He appears in the revelation of mercy as the God who “has no pleasure in the death of the wicked; who wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” ” The grace of God” revealed in the Gospel ” brings salvation to all,” without exception, who in the faith of the truth will receive it.⁸⁸

I am persuaded that the doctrine of personal election is very plainly taught in Scripture; but I am equally persuaded that the minister misunderstands that doctrine who finds it, in the least degree, hampering him in presenting a full and a free salvation as the gift of God to every one who hears the Gospel; and that the man abuses the doctrine who finds in it anything which operates as a barrier in the way of his receiving, as a sinner, all the blessings of the Christian salvation, in the belief of the truth. Indeed, when rightly understood, it can have no such effect. For what is that doctrine, but just this, in other words,–It is absolutely certain that a vast multitude of the race of man shall be saved through Christ?’ And it is as certain, that if any one of those to whom that salvation is offered, remains destitute of it, and perishes eternally, it is entirely owing to his own obstinate refusal of what is freely, honestly, presented to him. The kindness of God, as manifested in the gift of his Son, is kindness to the race of man; and when, as an individual, I credit the kindness of God to man, so strangely displayed, so abundantly proved, I cannot find any reason why I should not depend on this kindness, and expect to be saved even as others.

Whenever a man hesitates about placing his dependence on the mercy of God, because he is not sure whether he be elected or not, he gives clear evidence that he does not yet understand the Gospel. He does not apprehend “the manifestation of the love of God to man.” When he sees God in Christ reconciling the world to himself, “he does not need to ask, Is the plan of mercy such as I am warranted to embrace? may I not somehow be excluded from availing myself of it? These, and similar suggestions, which draw away his mind from the voice of God to the speculations of his own mind, are no more regarded.” He sees God rich in mercy, ready to forgive; just, and the justifier of the ungodly. He cannot but place his confidence in him. ” Jehovah,” as it has been happily said, “by the manifestation of what he has done, especially in sending Christ, and delivering him up, the just in the room of the unjust, pleads his own cause with such subduing pathos, that there is no more power of resistance; but the person, who is the object of the demonstration, yields himself up to the authority and glory of the truth.”⁸⁹ The sinner, thus cordially believing the Gospel, gladly and gratefully receives “the Savior of the world” as his Savior, and trusts that by the grace of God he shall partake of “the common salvation.” John Brown of Broughton, Discourses and Sayings of our Lord Jesus Christ (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1854), 49-51. [Some spelling modernized; footnotes and values original; and underlining mine.]

_______________________
⁸⁷Isa. iv. 8, 9.

⁸⁸Tit, iii, 4, 2 Cor. v. 19. Ezek, xxxiii, 11. 1 Tim. ii, 3, 4. Tit. ii. 11

⁸⁹Hogg of Alyth–View of the Economy of Grace, pp. 14, 15.

M’Cheyne:

“Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice is to the sons of men.”—Proverbs 8:4.

( 1) THESE are the words of wisdom; and wisdom in the book of Proverbs is none other than our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. This is evident from chapter 1, verse 23, where He says, “Behold, I will pour out my Spirit unto you”; but it is Christ alone who has the gift of the Holy Spirit. And again, from 8:22, where He says, “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way”; and verse 30: “Then I was by him as one brought up with him; and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him.” These words are true of none but of Jesus Christ, the Word that was with God, and was God, by whom all things were made.

(2) The places He goes to with the invitation.–First, He goes to the country. He climbs every eminence, and cries there; then He descends to the highway where many roads meet. Second, He goes to the city. He begins at the gates, where the people are assembled to make bargains and hear causes; then He proceeds along the principal avenue into the city, and cries in at every door as He passes. He first goes out into the highways and hedges, then goes into the streets and lanes of the city, carrying the blessed message.

(3) Observe the manner in which He invites.–He cries aloud, He puts forth the voice, He stands and cries, He calls and lifts up His voice, He seems like some merchant offering his wares, first in the market, and then from door to door. Never did busy crier offer to sell his goods with such anxiety as Jesus offers His salvation; verse 10: “Receive my instruction, and not silver; and knowledge rather than choice gold.”

(4) Observe to whom the invitation is addressed.–Verse 4: “Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice is to the sons of men.” Merchants only offer their goods to certain classes of the people that will buy; but Jesus offers His to all men. Wherever there is a son of Adam, wherever there is one born of woman, the word is addressed to him: he that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Doctrine.–Christ offers Himself as a Savior to all of the human race.

Read the rest of this entry »

[comments below]

Dabney:

[The Problem:]

But the difficulties which beset the subject are great, and unless you differ from me, you will feel that the manner in which they are dealt with by some Calvinistic writers, is unsatisfactory. The objections are of two classes. From the universal offer of atonement through Christ, and from Scripture. The fact that God makes this offer literally universal, cannot be doubted, nor must we venture to insinuate that He is not sincere therein. (Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:16, 17). The usual answer given by Calvinists of the rigid school to this objection is that God may sincerely offer this salvation to every creature, because, although not designed for all, it is in its nature sufficient for, and adapted to all. They say that since Christ’s sacrifice is of infinite value, and as adequate for covering all the sins of every sinner in the universe, as of one; and since Christ bears the common nature of all sinners, and God’s revealed, and not His secret, decretive, will is the proper rule of man’s conduct, this satisfaction may be candidly offered to all. Arminians rejoin, that this implies an adoption of their conception of the nature of the atonement, as a general satisfaction for human guilt as a mass and whole; that the punishment of gospel hardened sinners for unbelief (which we admit will occur), would be unjust on our scheme, since by it they would be punished for not believing what would not be true, if they had believed it; and that since, on our scheme the believing of a non elect sinner is not naturally, but only morally impossible, it is a supposible case for argument’s sake, and this case supposed, God could not be sincere, unless such a sinner should be saved in Christ, supposing He came. The honest mind will feel these objections to be attended with real difficulty. Thus, in defining the nature of Christ vicarious work, Calvinists assert a proper substitution and imputation of individuals’ sins. On the strict view, the sins of the non elect were never imputed to Christ. The fact, then, that an infinite satisfaction was made for imputed guilt does not seem to be a sufficient ground for offering the benefits thereof to those whose sins were never imputed.

The student should understand fully the ingenious pertinacity with which this line of objection is urged, and reinforced; from the command which makes it all sinners duty to believe on Christ for their own salvation; from the alleged impossibility of their reaching any appropriating faith by the Calvinistic view, and from the various warnings of Scripture, which clearly contemplate the possible destruction of one for whom Christ died. Our opponents proceed thus. God commands every man to believe on Christ. But since only an appropriating faith saves, and since God of course calls for a saving faith, and not the faith of Devils. God commands every man to appropriate Christ by his faith. But the man for whom Christ did not die has no right to appropriate Him. it would be erroneous presumption, and not faith. Again, both Roman Catholics and Arminians object that the strict Calvinistic scheme would make it necessary for a man’s mind to pass through and accept a paralogism, in order to believe unto salvation. This point may be found stated with the utmost adroitness, in the works of Bellamy, (loco citato ). He argues, if I know that Christ died only for the elect, then I must know whether I am elect, in order to be sure that He died for me. But God’s election is secret, and it is mere fanaticism to pretend that I know my own election by direct revelation. My name is nowhere set down specifically in the Bible. That book directs me to find out my election a posteriori by finding in my own graces the results of the secret decree towards me. Thus I am shut up to this sophism, in order to obey God’s command to believe. I must assume, in advance of proof, that I am elected in order to attain through faith the Christian traits, by which alone I can infer that I am elected. The third argument is that founded on the warnings against apostasy. In Rom. 14:15, for instance, the Apostle cautions strong Christians “not to destroy, with their meat, those for whom Christ died.” Hebrews 10:29, the apostate “counts the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing.” 2 Peter 2:1, heretics “even deny the Lord that bought them.” Here, it is urged, Calvinists must either hold that some of the elect perish, or that Christ died for others than the elect. Lectures, 523-524.

Read the rest of this entry »

Barnes:

In denying that it was in itself efficacious, it was meant to affirm that the atonement was something which could be contemplated apart from the purpose to apply it; that it had a dignity and value which could not be adequately measured by its actual application; that it was in its nature applicable t¹o any number of men; that if God had chosen to apply it to all the world, or to have greatly increased the number of the elect, the Redeemer would not have been required. to increase, renew, or prolong his sufferings. Its actual application to man was supposed to be the result of th good pleasure of God. It was supposed that there was a covenant transaction between the Father and the Son, assuring him that he should see of the travail of his soul and should be satisfied, and that his people should be willing in the day of his power. It was not supposed that the exact amount of this number was fixed by the nature of the atonement, but depended on the mercy and promise of God.

To the Redeemer’s sufferings and death contemplated apart from the actual purpose to apply His merits, I chose, in accordance with many writers, to apply the word atonement. The actual application of his work, I supposed might be appropriately expressed by the word redemption. It was not thought that this was a departure from Scripture usage. The word atonement occurs but once, as applicable to the death of Christ in the New Testament; the word redemption often, and this latter word it is supposed always with reference to the purpose to apply it. It did not seem then to be a gross violation of Scripture usage, to describe by the word atonement a thing which may and must be contemplated–the highest and best gift of God–the sufferer, the bleeding victim, the atoning sacrifice; still less can it be seen how this usage can be construed into an offence against the Confession of Faith. In all our standards of doctrine the word atonement never occurs. Nor is it the purpose of the standards to describe the thing which I wished to express by the word–the original independent applicability of the sufferings of Christ. The Confession of Faith states only its application. For that it uses the word redemption. It affirms of that, that it is limited, and was intended to be limited. That the Sermon never denied–and by what rule the Protestants have arraigned me, for using a word not in the Confession of Faith, and in a sense in which I chose to use it in accordance with the best writers; and used in describing a thing which the Confession does not profess to describe, but which it in no instance denies; how this can be a grave offence against our standards does not appear., If this is the measure by which justice is to be meted out every where, it will not be difficult to find crimes under the most orthodox exterior, and heresy, where any order of men may have an insatiable thirst to find it.

Albert Barnes, The Way of Salvation: A Sermon, Delivered at Morristown New Jersey, Together with Mr Barnes Defence of the Sermon, 7^th ed. (New York: Leavitt, Lord & Co, 1836), 67-69. [Italics original; footnote mine; and underlining mine.] [Credit to Jim Beale for the heads up on Barnes.]

____________________

¹The intent here is to further document the 19^th century distinction and separation between atonement and redemption. One does not have to agree with, or identify with Barnes’ overall theology.