Issue #4: Is the Blood of Christ “Wasted” on
Those Who Are Eternally Lost?
Some who argue for limited atonement
assert that if some people reject Christ and experience eternal punishment,
then somehow the blood of Christ has been “wasted” or “shed in vain” for them.
From a Calvinistic perspective, the argument presupposes that if God did
something in the death of Christ for the non-elect that does not redound unto
their salvation, then His blood is wasted. It furthermore presupposes that if
God wills that Christ die for the sins of all people and that all those who for
whom he died are not ultimately saved from their sins, then God is doing
something in vain or is wasting His efforts to bring about an end that
ultimately remains unfulfilled.
There are several problems with the “wasted
blood” argument, as pointed out by Richard Baxter and others. First, one must distinguish
between defect or failure in the atonement itself versus failure due to the
fault of unbelievers to receive the benefit of the atonement. The atonement itself
is perfect and complete. It is sufficient to save anyone who meets God’s condition
of salvation: repentance of sin and faith in Christ. God’s purpose in the
atonement was to demonstrate His love for all people, not just some people.
Who are we to tell God that Christ
died in vain when God tells us that Christ died for all, even for those who
ultimately reject Him? As Richard Baxter says, we should “be afraid of
blaspheming God” by suggesting that Christ died in vain. Baxter went on to make
the point that God created Adam in all perfection, yet Adam, and thus all
humanity, fell. Did God create Adam in vain? God’s purpose in the atonement is
completely fulfilled in His just punishment of unbelievers for rejecting God’s
grace given in Christ by His death on the cross for their sins. Baxter continues
to list many benefits of the atonement to unbelievers, including the fact that
all people are capable of salvation based on the atonement. This point has also
been argued by many Calvinists.
Richard Baxter has strong words for
anyone who would see the death of Christ as being “in vain” or that Christ is
an “imperfect Redeemer” if He died for the sins of people who die in unbelief
and are eternally lost:
Those that dare say, that Christ is an
imperfect Redeemer if he does not procure Faith itself for every man that he
Dies for, (which is their Master Argument) may as well say, that God is an
imperfect Creator, because he makes not Worms to be Men; or that he is an
imperfect Conservator because he preserved not man form Mortality, Damnation
and antecedent Calamities; especially from Sin: Or that he is imperfectly
Merciful, because he permits Men to sin; and Condemns them: Or that Christ is
an Imperfect Redeemer of the Elect, because he suffers them after his
Redemption to Sin, Suffer and Die: Or, that the Holy Ghost is an imperfect
Sanctifier and Caller, because many wicked men are Sanctified and Believe imperfectly
(so as will not suffice to Salvation) and because they resist and quench the
Spirit, and fall from that Faith and Sanctification which they had. Or that the
Spirit is an imperfect Comforter; because so many Saints Live and Die in such
uncomfortable sadness: Or that Scripture is an imperfect means, because the
Effects is so imperfect. In a word, they may as well say, that where God does
not overcome men’s wicked dispositions, he is an imperfect God to them in regard
of his Mercies: All which beseem not the Tongue of a Christian. (Baxter, Universal
Redemption, 65-66 [spelling updated])
Baxter lists at least twenty benefits
that all people receive by virtue of Christ’s death for all, and none of these
are “in vain” on God’s part but effectually underlie His goodness and wisdom in
all things. (Baxter, Catholick Theologie, 1.2.53-54) (David L. Allen, The
Atonement: A Biblical, Theological, and Historical Study of the Cross of Christ
[Nashville: B&H Academic, 2019], 223-25)