“Yes; let us have a discussion—anything to keep my mind off this misfortune till I am prepared to think calmly about it. In reply, then, to your inquiry, I say I scarcely know what to think. It would seem reasonable to me, though, that Christ died for all precisely alike—for one just as much as another. All were on the same level. By His death He removed the obstacles placed in the way by original sin or Adam’s transgression. He thus made salvation possible to all men. Christ provided the means, and left it to man’s choice whether he would use the means or not. That would seem just and right.”
“So it might at the first glance,” answered the Lieutenant, “and it is the way men would like to have it. Nothing could be more agreeable to the carnal heart. But let us calmly examine your position. You think then that Jesus died for no individual in particular, but for the whole race of men in general?”
“That seems to be reasonable,” replied Ernest, “and no one could complain.”
“Yes, reasonable according to man’s notions,” rejoined the Lieutenant, “and according to the principles of mere human philosophy. But the main objection to it, is that it is in diametrical opposition to the Scriptures. For they emphatically declare that Christ gave Himself for the Church. All through the New Testament we find such expressions as ‘died for His people.’ Jesus, Himself repeatedly spoke of ‘His people’ for whom He would give His life.”
“But does not the Bible say ‘He was made a propitiation not only for our sins, but for the sins of the whole world?’ What does that mean?”
“Well, suppose Christ had not died at all, how many would have been saved?”
“None at all,” said Ernest.
“Then the answer is that Jesus died sufficiently for all the world, but effectually for His own people. He made such an atonement that every one could be saved who wanted to be. And this is the meaning of every passage of Scripture which is similar to the one cited by you.”
“But,” asked Ernest, “what was the use of dying sufficiently for all, when it was known that all would not be saved?”
“Christ had to die for the elect,” replied the Lieutenant, “and in so doing He died sufficiently to save the entire world. If the atonement is sufficient to save all, that throws the responsibility of the damnation of those who are lost upon themselves. But how much broader do you want the atonement, if it takes in all who want to be saved? Why should you want Christ to make an effectual atonement for those who do not want to be saved?”