Fuller - The sufficiency of the Atonement?

[makesends]

Since it fits, the Jews are Commanded to have Jesus Christ as their God. And when a Gentile keeps the Law, he shows that the Law is written on his heart. The Law to Worship Jesus Christ is written on the heart of all...

In this sense, Christ can be Propitiation for the World; especially for those who Believe...

Agreed. There is reason to believe that EVERY elect believer was given the gospel, in one way or another.

The way I put it, "If anyone is the propitiation for any at all in the world, it is only Christ." There are several such statements in the Bible, and, if I remember, at least most of them carry that emphasis in the context, so that a possible rendering is as I show there — "It is only in Christ that all can be made alive.", and such.

 

[makesends]

Romans 1 argues that all are without excuse concerning the existence of God. Thus to Him all believe, His Divine attributes are clearly seen in creation.

Not sure I follow that argument. But yes, Romans 1 even goes so far as to say they knew him, though they suppressed that knowledge. But your last sentence, I don't get:

Thus to Him all believe, His Divine attributes are clearly seen in creation.

Anyhow

Well, I was making a distinction between all are without excuse and cannot claim they do not believe there is God, and in belief in the Gospel of Christ.

In the latter belief/faith is granted by God, the former is the status of all men, they know there is God, and are without excuse.

Oh, ok. Yes, agreed.

And such is the nature of rebellion against God. Reminds me of a statement by an atheist, that babies are born atheists by default! Besides that they have no way to prove such a thing, the assumption itself reeks of suppression of a default knowledge of God!

If there is no God, why must they declare their independence from him?

 

[David1701]

Andrew Fuller
"He died for the human race; while He made an atonement for the elect only, the atonement was sufficient to save the non-elect if they would only believe. The atonement was sufficient to save and would save the elect, regardless of whether they ever heard the gospel or believed in Jesus or the atonement; but the non-elect must believe in the atonement in order for it to be able to save them."


I disagree with Fuller.


Thoughts?

Fuller's statement makes no sense. How could Jesus have "died for the human race", without atoning for many of them?

Can you imagine preaching this?

"Jesus shed his blood and died for all of you; however, he only atoned for some of you. His non-atoning torture, shedding of blood and death on the cross would save many of you, if you believed; but, since he didn't atone for you, you won't believe and his death will be of no use to you at all.".

Great message!

 

[David1701]

Andrew Fuller
"He died for the human race; while He made an atonement for the elect only, the atonement was sufficient to save the non-elect if they would only believe. The atonement was sufficient to save and would save the elect, regardless of whether they ever heard the gospel or believed in Jesus or the atonement; but the non-elect must believe in the atonement in order for it to be able to save them."


I disagree with Fuller.


Thoughts?

Further to my previous post...

Fuller's assertion that the atonement would save the elect, regardless of them hearing the gospel, or believing in Jesus, is heretical, since salvation is only through faith in Jesus Christ.

 

[Deleted member 6]

The Canons of Dort seem to echo this sentiment…

The Second Main Point of Doctrine

Article 3: The Infinite Value of Christ’s Death

This death of God’s Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world.