The Big Question: Limited Atonement

I've been questioned on the subject of limited atonement a number of times recently. While I don't know all the answers, I feel like I'm beginning to gain a good grasp on a lot of the questions. Moving through the process of thinking through certain doctrines over the past year, I'm close, but not fully verbally articulate, in my understanding of the implications of Christ's death in place of some but not all. So my thinking in putting this post up is that it would be more beneficial to both myself and a fellow investigator if I wrote out my response rather than trying to bumble through talking about it. Please feel free to ponder through this doctrine with me and, civilly, raise important questions that need to be taken alongside these thoughts.

Here are the two choices:
1. Christ died for the sins of all men.
2. Christ died for the sins of chosen men.

The first option can lead one down two possible roads. The first road being universalism. If Christ died for the sins of all men and all men's sins are covered by His atonement, then all men will be saved. The implications of this understanding are obvious. The second road one may follow leads to an unjust God. Suppose that Christ's atonement was for the sins of all men, but in order to get it, men must choose to accept this sacrifice on their behalf. Most folks who believe that Christ died for all are not going to be universalists, but are going to sit in this second camp. So why is God unjust in this situation?

Allow me to explain this by means of an explanation of limited atonement. No man, in and of himself, is good. "There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside... there is no fear of God before their eyes." (Rom 3:10-18) Romans 5:12 tells us that "just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, death spread to all men, because all have sinned." We are "dead in [our] trespasses and sins." (Eph 2:1) All men, unless they have been made alive by the new birth, are dead in sin.

But what is sin? Sin is rebellion against a pure, perfect, and holy God. Man is inherently rebellious against God; rebellion is part of our nature since the fall of man. (Gen 3) Crimes committed against earthly laws lead to earthly consequences equal to the offense. Shoplifting, for instance, will lead to a set fine and possibly some jail time. Armed robbery will probably get you a few years in the slammer. These things are punishable, but only to a certain extent. These acts are finite acts committed against finite institutions.

Rebellion against God, on the other hand, is an eternal offense. This is because God is an eternal being who demands perfection. Our entire purpose on the earth is to worship God; true worship cannot be marred by any rebellion. Therefore, any offense against God eternally mars our worship and our entire purpose. A crime against an eternal God is eternal in itself. An eternal crime demands eternal consequences. This is why it is just that unrepentant sinners spend eternity in hell. I didn't say this was a fun doctrine, but this is what is taught in Scripture. Jesus talks about hell more than anybody and He isn't the one I intend to argue with.

For the believer, this eternal offense is negated by the sacrifice of a perfect, eternal being. Jesus, the God-man, was the perfect sacrifice to wash away eternal sin of those within His flock.

It is just that sin is punished. It is just that all sin is punished, even that of the saved. It would not be just for sin to be punished twice. The nature of Christ's atonement prevents this injustice. According to the doctrine of limited atonement, Christ's atoning work was only for the elect, not every man to ever walk the earth. This means that sin is punished at the cross for those whom God had chosen to be His from before the foundations of the earth. For the elect, Jesus took on the punishment for their sin as they took on His righteousness in the sight of God. (II Cor 5:21) For all who are not chosen by God, their sin is punished by an eternity in hell. In this scenario, all sin is accounted for and justly punished. The sin of believers is punished at the cross while the sin of unbelievers is punished in hell.

Now return to the beginning, it is unjust for Christ to die for the sin of all men and give them the choice to accept or reject this sacrifice on their behalf. By Christ dying for the sin of all men, all sin is accounted for and punished at the cross. Those who choose to accept this sacrifice reap the benefits of their sin being punished through Christ. Those who do not accept this sacrifice on their behalf, are punished in hell for eternity for their sin-rebellion against a perfect, eternal being. Therefore, in this scenario, the sin of the unbeliever is punished twice! His sin is punished in hell, but his sin is also punished at the cross by Jesus. This is unjust and our God is not an unjust God.

Limited atonement teaches the justice of God. You may say that a God who works in this way is not loving. But is a loving God unjust? Or, does a loving God prove His love sacrificially AND see true justice served all at the same time?