Luke
22:19-21: “And he took bread, gave thanks,
broke it, gave it to them, and said, ‘This is my body, which is given for you.
Do this in remembrance of me.’
“In the same way he also took the cup after the supper and said, ‘This cup is
the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you. But look, the hand
of the one betraying me is at the table with me.’”
The
significance of this text for the extent of the atonement is twofold: (1) The text
indicates that Jesus was at the table during this portion of the Lord’s Supper,
and (2) Jesus said the cup represents the new covenant in his blood, “which is
poured out for you.” Jesus included Judas in his plural use of “you.” All are agreed
that Judas died as a reprobate, yet Jesus said he shed his blood for the sins
of Judas. This, by implication, confirms that the atonement is unlimited.
Interestingly,
both Augustine and Calvin interpreted the text in this fashion.
For
Judas the traitor was punished, and Christ was crucified: but us He redeemed by
His blood, and He punished him in the matter of his price. For he threw down
the price of silver, for which by him the Lord had been sold; and he knew not
the price wherewith he had himself by the Lord been redeemed. This thing was done
in the case of Judas. (Augustine, “Exposition on the Book of Psalms,” in NPNF1,
8:309)
Calvin
in numerous places explicitly says Judas was at the table and that Christ died
for his sins. (David L. Allen, “A Critique of Limited Atonement,” in Calvinism:
A Biblical and Theological Critique, ed. David L. Allen and Steve M. Lemke
[Nashville, Tenn.: B&H Academic, 2022], 113)
Examples of Calvin explicitly teaching
that Judas was at the table and that Christ died for his sins includes his
commentaries on Matt 26:21 and John 6:56:
Matthew 26:21. One of
you will betray me. To render the treachery of Judas more detestable, he
points out the aggravated baseness of it by this circumstance, that he was
meditating the act of betraying him while he sat with him at the holy
table. For if a stranger had done this, it would have been more easily endured;
but that one of his intimate friends should form such a design, and—what is
more—that, after having entered into an infamous bargain, he should be present
at the sacred banquet, was incredibly monstrous. And therefore Luke employs a
connecting particle which marks a contrast: but yet, to the hand of
him that betrayeth me. And though Luke adds this saying of Christ after the
supper was finished, we cannot obtain from it any certainty as to the order of
time, which, we know, was often disregarded by the Evangelists. Yet I do not
deny that it is probable that Judas was present, when Christ distributed to his
disciples the symbols of his flesh and blood.
[John 6:]56. He who eateth my flesh. This is another confirmation; for while he
alone has life in himself, he shows how we may enjoy it, that is, by eating
his flesh; as if he had affirmed that there is no other way in which
he can become ours, than by our faith being directed to his flesh. For no one
will ever come to Christ as God, who despises him as man; and, therefore, if
you wish to have any interest in Christ, you must take care, above all things,
that you do not disdain his flesh.
Dwelleth in me, and I in him. When he says that he dwelleth in us, the meaning
is the same as if he had said, that the only bond of union, and the way by
which he becomes one with us, is, when our faith relies on his death. We may
likewise infer from it, that he is not now speaking of the outward symbol,
which many unbelievers receive equally with believers, and yet continue
separated from Christ. It enables us also to refute the dream of those who say,
that Judas received the body of Christ as well as the other apostles, when
Christ gave the bread to all; for as it is a display of ignorance to limit this
doctrine to the outward sign, so we ought to remember what I have formerly
said, that the doctrine which is here taught is sealed in the Lord’s Supper.
Now, it is certain, in the first place, that Judas never was a member of
Christ; secondly, it is highly unreasonable to imagine the flesh of Christ
to be dead and destitute of the Holy Spirit; and, lastly, it is a mockery to
dream of any way of eating the flesh of Christ without faith, since
faith alone is the mouth—so to speak—and the stomach of the soul.
