Jesus was the greatest sacrifice

JESUS WAS THE GREATEST SACRIFICE
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
1 John 2:2 2He is the atoningsacrificefor our sins,
and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole
world.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
Pulpit Commentary Homiletics
Our Advocate And Propitiation
1 John 2:1, 2
W. Jones
My little children, these things write I unto you, etc. Very tender and
eminently Johanneanis the opening of this paragraph. "My little children."
The appellation suggests:
1. The spiritual paternity of the apostle. St. Paul addressedthe same words to
those GalatianChristians whom he had spiritually begotten(Galatians 4:19).
He referred with great tenderness and force to the same relationship in
writing to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 4:14, 15). Probably many of those to
whom St. John was writing were his spiritual children.
2. The spiritual affectionof the apostle. The use of the diminutive indicates
this.

3. The spiritual authority of the apostle. His fatherly relation to them, his
tender affectionfor them, and his venerable age combine to invest his words
with authority. Our text teaches -
I. THAT THE GOSPELOF JESUS CHRIST DISCOURAGES SIN. "These
things write I unto you, that ye sin not." The "these things" are the statements
made in chapter 1 John 1:6-10. The fact that sin exists even in the Christian is
there affirmed, and gracious provisionfor the forgiveness ofsin and for the
sanctificationof the believer is set forth. And now, in order that no one by
reasonof these things should look upon sin as inevitable, or regard it with
tolerance, orfail to battle againstit, St. John writes, "These things write I
unto you, that ye sin not." St. Paul guards againstthe same misuse of the
provisions of the rich grace of God thus: "Shallwe continue in sin, that grace
may abound? God forbid" (Romans 6:1, 2). That the provisions of Divine
grace for the pardon of sin afford no encouragementto its commissionis
proved by:
1. The object of Christ's mediatorial work. To "save his people from their
sins." "He appearedto, put awaysin by the sacrifice ofhimself" (cf.
Ephesians 1:4; Ephesians 2:10; Ephesians 5:25-27;Titus 2:14).
2. The costof Christ's mediatorial work. The greatprice at which pardon and
salvationwere rendered possible should powerfully deter from the practice of
sin. "Godspared not his own Son," etc.;"Ye were not redeemedwith
corruptible things, as silver and gold,... but with the precious blood of Christ,"
etc. Since redemption from sin is so expensive a process, sinmust be not a
trifling, but a terrible evil.
3. The influence of Christ's mediatorial work. The love of God manifestedin
our Lord and Saviour is fitted to awakenour love to him. Love to God springs
up in the heart of every one who truly believes in Jesus Christ; and love to
God is the mightiest and most resolute antagonistof sin.
II. THAT THE GOSPELOF JESUS CHRIST RECOGNIZESTHE
LIABILITY OF EVEN GOOD MEN TO SIN. "And if any man sin." This
liability arises from:

1. Our exposure to temptation. Sometimes we are confronted by our
"adversarythe devil, as a roaring lion." But more frequently are we in danger
by reasonof "the wiles of the devil." "Satanfashioneth himself into an angel
of light," that he may deceive souls and lead them into sin. We are also
assailedby temptations in human society - temptations which are plausible
and appearharmless, but which are full of peril to us.
2. The infirmity of our moral nature. There is that in us which is ready to
respond to temptation. Thus temptations which appeal to our sensual
appetites sometimes prove too strong for our spiritual principles, the sensual
in us not being in complete subjection to the spiritual. Temptations which
promise present pleasure or profit, but involve the risk of some of our most
precious interests in the future, are sometimes successfulbecause ofdefective
spiritual perception or of moral weakness. This liability to sin is confirmed
(1) by the history of goodmen, e.g., Noah, Abraham, Moses, Aaron, David,
Peter;
(2) by our ownexperience.
III. THE GOSPELOF JESUS CHRIST ANNOUNCES GRACIOUS
PROVISION TO MEET THE LIABILITY OF GOOD MEN TO SIN. "And if
any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father," etc.
1. Jesus Christis our Representative with the Father. "We have an Advocate
with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous." The word translated"advocate"
means one who is called to our side; then a Comforter, Helper, Advocate.
"Representative"is a word which, perhaps, expressesthe meaning here. Jesus
Christ "appears before the face of God for us." He stands by us with his face
directed towards the face of God the Father, obtaining for us the forgiveness
and favour, the stimulus and strength which we need. As ProfessorLias puts
it, "We have One who stands by us παρά, yet looks towardπρὸς the Father,
and who, one with us and with him, can enable us to do all things through his
all-powerful aid." And he is "righteous." In this he is unlike us. We are
unrighteous, and therefore unfit to appear before the face of God. But he,
being perfectly righteous, is fitted to appear before God on our behalf.

2. Jesus Christis also the Propitiation for our sins. "And he is the Propitiation
for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world." The
primary meaning of "propitiation" was that which appeases orturns away
the wrath of the gods from men. But we must take heed that we do not rashly
apply the ideas of heathenism as to its gods, to the only living and true, the
holy and gracious God. So much has been said and written concerning the
propitiation, which seems to us to have no warrant in the sacredScriptures,
and much that has not been honourable to the holy and ever-blessedGodand
Father, that it is with diffidence that we venture upon any remarks
concerning it. The New Testamentdoes not give us any explanation of the
propitiation; it presents us with no theory or scheme concerning it; it simply
states it as a great fact in the Divine way of salvation. And it would have been
well if the example of the sacredwriters in this respecthad been more
generallyfollowed. Here is the declarationof St. Paul: "Being justified freely
by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:whom God set
forth to be a Propitiation, through faith, by his blood, to show his
righteousness,"etc. (Romans 3:24-26). JesusChristhimself is said to be the
Propitiation for our sins. No particular portion of his life or work, his
sufferings or death, is specifiedin our text as constituting the propitiation.
Christ, in the whole of his mediatorial ministry - life and work, sufferings and
death, resurrection, ascension, and intercession - is our Propitiation. We
venture to make two observations.
(1) The propitiation was not anything offered to God to render him willing to
bless and save us. If proof of this were required, we have it in chapter 1 John
4:10: "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his
Son to be the Propitiation for our sins." God did not provide the propitiation
to propitiate himself. Our Saviour is the Gift of the Father's love to us, not the
Procurerof that love for us. It is nowhere said in the Scriptures that Christ
reconciledGod to man. Such reconciliationwas never needed. The great
Father was always disposedto bless and save man.
(2) The propitiation was designedto remove obstructions to the free flowing
forth of the mercy of Godto man. Here was an obstruction: man had broken
the holy Law of God, had setit at naught, and was still doing so. But man
cannot be pardoned while he stands in such an attitude and relation to Law.

Love itself demands that Law shall be obeyedand honoured. True mercy can
only be exercisedin harmony with righteousness. The well-being of man is an
impossibility except he be wonto loyalty to the Law of God. Jesus Christ
vindicated the solemn authority of God's holy Law by his obedience unto
death, even the death of the cross. Again, there was an obstruction in the heart
of man to the free flowing forth of the mercy of God to him. Man regarded
God with distrust and suspicion, if not with enmity. "Alienatedand enemies in
your mind in your evil works" is the apostolic descriptionof unrenewed man.
The propitiation was designedto reconcile man to God, and dispose him to
acceptthe offered salvation. "Godwas in Christ reconciling the world unto
himself." The sacrifice ofChrist is the supreme manifestation of the infinite
love of God towards man (cf. John 3:16; Romans 5:8). When that love is
heartily believed in, man is reconciledto God; he no longerregards him as an
enemy, but as his gracious and adorable God and Father. This accords with
the statementof St. Paul that Christ Jesus is "a Propitiation through faith by
his blood." "The true Christian idea of propitiation," says Bushnell, "is not
that God is placatedor satisfiedby the expiatory pains offered him. It
supposes, first, a subjective atoning, or reconciliationin us; and then, as a
further result, that Godis objectivelypropitiated, or set in a new relation of
welcome and peace. Before he could not embrace us, even in his love. His love
was the love of compassion;now it is the love of complacencyand permitted
friendship." And this propitiation is for all men. "The Propitiation for our
sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world." If any are not saved,
it is neither because ofany deficiencyin the Divine purposes or provisions,
nor because the propitiation of Christ is limited to certain persons or to a
certain number only. The salvationof Jesus Christis adequate to all men, and
is offered freely to all men. If any are not saved, it is because theyrefuse the
redemptive mercy of Godin Christ Jesus. - W.J.

Biblical Illustrator
Little children, it is the lasttime: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall
come, even now are there many antichrists
1 John 2:18-23
St. John's "lasthour
George G. Findlay, B. A.
The Apostle John is an old man; he has lived through a long day. The way of
the Lord that he teaches is by this time a well-markedpath, trodden by the
feet already of two generations. Time has vindicated the bold inference that
the agedapostle drew from his experience. The disciples of Jesus "have
known the truth, which abideth in us and shall be with us forever." St. John
has but one thing to say to his successors:"Abide in Him." As for the recent
secedersfrom the apostolic communion, their departure is a gain and not a
loss;for that is manifest in them which was before concealed(vers. 18, 19).
They bore the name of Christ falsely:antichrist is their proper title; and that
there are "many" such, who stand threateningly arrayed againstHis servants,
only proves that His word is doing its sifting and judicial work, that the Divine
life within the body of Christ is casting off dead limbs and foreign elements,
that the truth is accomplishing its destined result, that the age has come to its
ripeness and its crisis: "whence we perceive that it is the lasthour." We may
best expound the paragraphunder review by considering in order the crisis to

which the apostle refers, the danger which he denounces, and the safeguards
on which he relies — in other words, the lasthour, the many antichrists, and
the chrism from the Holy One.
I. "My children, it is THE LAST HOUR — We perceive that it is the last
hour." Bishop Westcott, in his rich and learned Commentary on this Epistle,
calls our attention to the absence ofthe Greek article: "A last hour it is
(ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν)" — so the apostle literally puts it; and the anarthrous
combination is peculiar here. (St. Paul's, "A day of the Lord is coming," in 1
Thessalonians 5:2, resembles the expression.) The phrase "seems to mark the
generalcharacterofthe period, and not its specific relation to 'the end.' It was
a period of criticalchange." "The hour" is a term repeatedly used in the
Gospelof St. John for the crisis of the earthly course ofJesus, the supreme
epochof His death and return to the Father. This guides us to St. John's
meaning here. He is looking backward, not forward. The venerable apostle
stands upon the border of the first Christian age. He is nearing the horizon,
the rim and outmost verge of that great"day of the Lord" which began with
the birth of the first John, the forerunner, and would terminate with his own
departure: himself the solitary survivor of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb.
The shadows were closing upon John; everything was alteredabout him. The
world he knew had passedor was passing quite away. Jerusalemhad fallen:
he had seenin vision the overthrow of mighty Rome, and the empire was
shakenwith rumours and fears of change. The work of revelation, he felt, was
all but complete. The finished truth of the revelationof the Father in the Son
was now confrontedby the consummate lie of heresy which denied them both
(ver. 22). He presided over the completion of the grand creative age, and he
saw that its end was come. Clearlyit was his last hour; and for aught he knew
it might be the world's last, the sun of time setting to rise no more, the crashof
doom breaking upon his dying ears. The world passes through greatcycles,
eachof which has its lasthour anticipating the absolute conclusion. The year,
with its course from spring to winter, from winter to autumn, the day from
dawn to dark, image the total course of time. The greatepochs and "days" of
human history have a finality. Eachof these periods in turn sensibly
anticipates the end of all things. Many greatand notable days of the Lord
there have been, and perhaps will be, many lasthours before the lastof all.

The earth is a mausoleum of dead worlds; in its grave mounds, tier above tier,
extinct civilisations lie orderly interred. Each "day" of history, with its last
hour, is a moment in that "age ofthe ages"whichincludes the measureless
circumference of time.
II. The Apostle John saw the proof of the end of the age in the appearance of
MANY ANTICHRISTS. The word "antichrist" has, by etymology, a double
meaning. The antichrist of whose coming St. John's readers had "heard," if
identical, as one presumes, with the awful figure of 2 Thessalonians2, is a
rival or mock-Christ, a Satanic caricature of the Lord Jesus;the "many
antichrists" were not that, but deniers, indeed destroyers of Christ; and this
the epithet may equally well signify. So there is no real disagreementin the
matter betweenSt. Paul and St. John. The heretic oppugners of Christ,
starting up before John's eyes in the Asian Churches, were forerunners,
whether at a greateror less distance, of the supreme antagonist, messengers
who prepared his way. They were of the same breed and likeness, and set
forth principles that find in him their full impersonation. These antichrists of
St. John's lasthour, the opponents then most to be dreaded by the Church,
were teachers offalse doctrine. They "deny that Jesus is the Christ" (ver. 22).
This denial is other than that which the same words had denoted fifty years
before. It is not the denial of Jewishunbelief, a refusalto acceptJesus of
Nazarethas the Messiah;it is the denial of Gnostic error, the refusal to admit
the Divine Sonship of Jesus and the revelationof the Godhead in manhood
through His person. Such a refusal makes the knowledge ofboth impossible;
neither is God understood as Father, nor Jesus Christ as Son, by these
misbelievers. The nature of the person of Christ, in St. John's view, is not a
question of transcendentaldogma or theologicalspeculation;in it lies the vital
point of an experimental and working Christian belief. "Who is he," the
apostle cries, "that overcomeththe world, except he that believes that Jesus is
the Sonof God?" (1 John 5:5); and again, "Everyone that believeth that Jesus
is the Christ, is begottenof God" (1 John 5:1). In passing from St. Paul's chief
Epistles to this of St. John, the doctrinal conflictis carriedback from the
atonement to the incarnation, from the work to the nature of Christ, from
Calvary to Bethlehem. There it culminates. Truth could reachno higher than
the affirmation, error could proceedno further than the contradiction, of the

completed doctrine of the Personof Christ as it was taught by St. John. The
final teaching of Divine revelationis daringly denied. "What think ye of the
Christ? — what do you make of Me?" is His crucial question to every age.
The two answers — that of the world with its false prophets and seducers (1
John 2:19; 1 John 4:5), and that of the Christian brotherhood, one with its
Divine Head — are now delivered in categoricalassertionand negation. Faith
and unfaith have eachsaidtheir last word.
III. While the Apostle John insists on the radical nature of the assaults made
in his lastdays upon the Church's Christological belief, HE POINTS WITH
ENTIRE CONFIDENCE TO THE SAFEGUARDS BY WHICH THAT
BELIEF IS GUARANTEED.
1. In the first place, "you, — in contrastwith the antichrists, none of whom
were really 'of us' (ver. 19) — you have a chrism from the Holy One (i.e.,
Christ); all of you know." the truth and can discern its "verity' (vers. 20, 21).
Again, in ver. 27, "The chrism that you receivedfrom Him abides in you, and
you have no need that anyone be teaching you. But as His chrism teaches you
about all things, and is true, and is no lie, and as it did teach you, abide in
Him." Chrism is Greek for anointing, as Christ for anointed; St. John's
argument lies in this verbal connection. The chrism makes Christians, and is
wanting to antichrists. It is the constitutive vital element common to Christ
and His people, pervading members and Head alike. We soonperceive
wherein this chrism consists. Whatthe apostle says of the chrism here he says
of the Spirit afterwards in 1 John 5:7: "It is the Spirit that beareth witness,
because the Spirit is the truth." And in 1 John 4:6 he contrasts the influences
working in apostolic and hereticalcircles respectivelyas "the spirit of truth"
and "oferror." The bestowalof the Spirit on Jesus of Nazarethis described
under the figure of unction by St. Peterin Acts 10:38, who tells "How God
anointed (christened) Him — made Him officially the Christ — with the Holy
Spirit and power." It was the possession, withoutlimit, of "the Spirit of truth"
which gave to the words of Christ their unlimited authority (John 3:34, 35).
Now out of that Holy Spirit which He possessedinfinitely in His Divine
fashion, and which His presence and teaching continually breathed, the Holy
One gave to His disciples;and all members of His body receive, according to
their capacity, "the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot receive," but

"whom" He "sends" unto His own "from the Father" (John 14:17;John
15:26, etc.). The Spirit of the Head is the vital principle of the Church,
resident in every limb, and by its universal inhabitation and operation
constituting the Body of Christ. "The communion of the Holy Ghost" is the
inner side of all that is outwardly visible in Church activity and fellowship. It
is the life of God in the societyof men. This Divine principle of life in Christ
has at the same time an antiseptic power. It affords the real security for the
Church's preservation from corruption and decay. For this gift St. Paul had
prayed long ago on behalf of these same Asian Christians (Ephesians 1:17-23).
This prayer had been answered. Paul's and John's children in the faith were
endowedwith a Christian discernment that enabled them to detectthe
sophistries and resistthe blandishments of subtle Gnostic error. This Spirit of
wisdom and revelationhas never desertedthe Church. "You know, all of you"
(ver. 20) — this is what the apostle really says. It is the most remarkable thing
in the passage. "Ihave not written unto you," he continues, "because you
know not the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the
truth." He appeals to the judgment of the enlightened lay commonalty of the
Church, just as St. Paul when he writes, "I speak as to men of sense;judge ye
what I say." St. John's "chrism" certainly did not guarantee a precise
agreementin all points of doctrine and of practice;but it covers essential
truth, such as that of the Godheadof the Redeemerhere in question. Much
less does the witness of the Spirit warrant individual men, whose hearts are
touched with His grace, in setting up to be oracles ofGod and mouthpieces of
the Holy Ghost. In that case the Holy Spirit must contradictHimself endlessly,
and God becomes the author of confusion and not of peace. But there is in
matters of collective faith a spiritual common sense, a Christian public
opinion in the communion of saints, behind the extravagancesofindividuals
and the party cries of the hour, which acts informally by a silent and
impalpable pressure, but all the more effectually, after the manner of the
Spirit.
2. To this inward and cumulative witness there corresponds an outward
witness, defined once for all. "You know the truth...that no lie is of the truth
That which you heard from the beginning, let it abide in you" (vers. 21, 24).
Here is an objective criterion, given in the truth about Christ and the Father

as John's readers heard it from the apostles atthe first, and as we find it
written in their books. Believing that to be true, the Church rejectedpromptly
what did not square with it. In the most downright and peremptory fashion
St. John asserts the apostolic witness to be a testof religious truth: "We are of
God: he that knows God hears us; he that is not of God hears us not. By this
we recognise the spirit of truth and the spirit of error" (1 John 4:6), Here is
the exteriortest of the inner light. The witness of the Spirit in the living
Church, and in the abiding apostolic word, authenticate and guard each
other. This must be so, if one and the self-same Spirit testifies in both.
Experience and Scripture coincide. Neither will suffice us separatedfrom the
other. Without experience, Scripture becomes a dead letter; without the norm
of Scripture, experience becomes a speculation, a fanaticism, or a conceit.
3. The third guarantee citedby St. John lies outside ourselves and the Church:
it is neither the chrism that rests upon all Christians, nor the apostolic
messagedepositedwith the Church in the beginning; it is the faithfulness of
our promise giving Lord. His fidelity is our ultimate dependence;and it is
involved in the two safeguards previouslydescribed. Accordingly, when the
apostle has said, in verse 24, "If that abide in you which ye heard from the
beginning, ye too shall abide in the Son and the Father," he adds, to make all
sure, in the next verse: "And this is the promise which He promised us — the
eternal life!" It is our Lord's own assurance overagain(John 8:51; John
15:4). The life of fellowship with the Father in the Son, which the antichrist
would destroy at its root by denying the Son, the Sonof God pledges Himself
to maintain amongst those who are loyal to His word, and the word of His
apostles, whichis virtually His own. He has promised us this (αὐτὸς
ἐπηγγείλατο) — He who says, "I am the resurrectionand the life." No brief or
transient existence is that securedto His people, but "the eternal life." Now
eternal life means with St. John, not as with St. Paul a prize to be won, but a
foundation on which to rest, a fountain from which to draw; not a future
attainment so much as a presentdivine, and therefore abiding, possession. It is
the life which came into the world from God with Jesus Christ (1 John 1:1, 2),
and in which every soulhas its part that is grafted into Him. Understanding
this, we see that the promise of life eternal, in verse 25, is not brought in as an
incitement to hope, but as a reassuranceto our troubled faith. "These things

have I written unto you," the apostle says, "concerning those that mislead
you" (ver. 26). Christ's word is set againsttheirs. Error cannotprevail against
the truth as it is in Jesus. "Our little systems have their day"; but the
fellowship of souls which rests upon the foundation of the apostles has within
it the powerof an indissoluble life. Such are the three guarantees of the
permanence of Christian doctrine and the Christian life, as they were
conceivedby St. John and are assertedby him here at his last hour, when the
tempests of persecutionand scepticalerrorwere on all sides let loose against
the Church.
(George G. Findlay, B. A.)
The dispensations
DeanGoulburn.
How could those days of primitive Christianity be called the last days,
inasmuch as since those days eighteenhundred years have elapsed, and still
the world's history has not reachedits close?The answeris obvious. The
whole period lying betweenthe first advent and the present year of grace is
but one oeconomy;and it is destined to be the last oeconomy, under which
man is to be tried. What is a dispensation — Οἰκονομία?Οἰκονομοςis the
administrator of a household, the lord of a family, he who dispenses to the
household their portion of meat in due season. It is a certain measure, more or
less, of moral light and help meted out by God, the greatHouseholder, to His
human family for the purpose of their probation. Any and every light and
help which man has from heaven constitutes, strictly speaking, a dispensation.
It seems, moreover, to be a principle of God's dealings that the light and
knowledge having been once supernaturally communicated, shall thenceforth
be left to radiate from its centre, to diffuse itself among mankind, by the
ordinary means of human testimony. Let us now proceedto review the leading
dispensations under which mankind has been placed.
1. A single arbitrary restriction, issuedmerely as a test of obedience, was the
first of them. The threat of death, in ease ofdisobedience, was a moral help to

our first parents, tending to keepthem in the narrow path of obedience and
happiness. But it did not enable them to stand. They broke the commandment,
and they fell.
2. The fall had in some mysterious manner put our first parents in possession
of a moral sense, orfaculty of discerning betweengoodand evil,
independently of Divine precept. To secondand aid the remonstrances ofthis
faculty, the heads of the human family had such bitter experience of the fruits
of transgressionas wouldabide with them to their dying day. Into this
experience of the results of transgressionwas infused, lest man should despair,
an element of faith and hope. Who shall say whether man, with these powers
brought to bear upon him, may not retrieve his ground and return in true
penitence to the bosom of his Father? So the dispensation of experienced
punishment on the part of the parent, of ancestralprecepton the part of the
children beganand run its course. But it proved an utter failure. The
principle of sin, engenderedin its primeval act, ate into the moral nature of
man like a gangrene, until at length blasphemy and immorality stalked
rampant upon the earth, and the vices of human kind, like the stature of the
men of those days, toweredto a gigantic height.
3. While the shades ofguilt were thus deepening towards a night of utter
depravity, and the few faithful ones in the line of Seth shone but with the
feeble ray of glowworms amid the surrounding darkness — an additional
dispensationwas instituted in the announcement of the deluge to the Patriarch
Noah, and the direction associatedwith it, to commence the building of the
ark. What a stirring voice from heavenwas this! What a Divine trumpet note
of warning in the ears of a generationsinking deeperevery moment into the
fatal torpor of moral insensibility! At length, when Divine patience had had
her perfectwork the flood OEconomycame to its close amid outpoured
torrents and gushing fountains of the deep.
4. When the stage ofthe earth had been clearedby the flood for another
probation of the human race, a new measure of light and help was meted out
by God, or, in other terms, a new dispensationwas introduced. Human law
was now instituted and sanctionedby heaven. It was now to be seenwhether
man's innate depravity would break through this barrier of restraint also.

5. It was succeededby the dispensationof Divine law, promulgated with the
most awful solemnity, and having annexed to it the most tremendous
sanctions.
6. With Samuel and the successionofprophets, as many as spoke orwrote
after him, commenced a new era, about three hundred and fifty years after
the giving of the law. And of this dispensationthe distinguishing characteristic
is, that it was constantlyexpanding itself, that fresh accessionswere
continually being made under it to man's moral and spiritual resources,that it
was a light continually increasing in brightness, shining more and more unto
the perfectday when the Sun of Righteousnessshouldrise with healing in His
wings.
7. And now at length men's yearnings and anticipations were to be realised.
The lasthour of the world's day — or, in other words, the final dispensation
under which man was to be tried — was at hand. The greatDeliverer
appearedand revealeda wholly new arrangement, or series of arrangements,
under and in virtue of which God would henceforth dealwith man.(1) Perfect
absolution from the guilt of pastsin — an absolutionobtained in such a
manner as should effectuallystrike the chord of love and gratitude in every
heart of man.(2) A communication of Divine strength through outward
means.(3)A perfect and explicit law embodying the purest morality which it is
possible to conceive. But as man was still, under this final dispensation, in a
state of probation, and a state of probation is not and cannotbe a final or
fixed state, the mind was still thrown forward by predictions of the Second
Advent, to a period when He, in whom the heart and hope of God's people is
bound up, shall come againto receive them to Himself, and to visit them with
eternal comfort, while vengeance, terrific vengeance, is takenupon all who,
though the new dispensationhas been proclaimed to them, shall not have
takenshelter under the refuge which it provides. We have now passedin
review the various dispensations under which man has been placed; and, thus
furnished for the fuller understanding of our text, we revert to the solemn
asseverationofthe apostle, that this under which we live is the final
oeconomy, and that with its close will terminate forever the probation of
mankind.

(DeanGoulburn.)
Last things
T. De Witt Talmage, D. D.
I. My hearers are coming nearer their LAST BUSINESS DAY. Men will ask
about you, and say, "Where is so-and-so?"And your friend wilt say, "Have
you not heard the news?" and will take a paper from his pocketand point to
your name on the death list. If things are wrong they will always staywrong.
No chance of correcting a false entry, or repairing the loss done to a customer
by a dishonest sample, or apologising for the imposition inflicted upon one of
your clerks.
II. Men are coming nearer to their LAST SINFUL AMUSEMENT. A
dissipated life soonstops. The machinery of life is so delicate that it will not
endure much trifling.
III. Men are coming nearer to their LAST SABBATH.
IV. We come near THE LAST YEAR OF OUR LIFE. The world is at leastsix
thousand years old. Sixty thousand years may yet come, and the procession
may seeminterminable; but our own closing earthly year is not far off.
V. We are coming nearerTHE LAST MOMENT OF OUR LIFE. That is
often the most cheerful moment. John Howard talkedof it with exhilaration,
and selectedhis own burial place, saying to his friend, "A spot near the village
of Dauphiney would suit me nicely." It is a poor time to start to getyour house
insured when the flames are bursting out of all the windows;and it is a poor
time to attempt to prepare for death when the realities of eternity are taking
hold of us.
(T. De Witt Talmage, D. D.)
Antichrist

Antichrist
Bp. Wm. Alexander.
This word is absolutely peculiar to St. John. The generaluse of ἀντί (contra)
and the meaning of the similarly formed word ἀντίθεος, lead to the conclusion
that the term means "adversaryof Messiah."The Jews derived their
conceptionfrom Daniel7:25; Daniel8:25; Daniel 11:36;Ezekiel38-39. The
name was probably formed by St. John. It was believed by the Jews that
Antichrist would appear immediately before the advent of Christ (cf. chap. 1
John 2:22; 4:3; 2 John 7). Our Lord mentioned "pseudo-Christs" as a sign
(Matthew 24:24). St. Paul gave a solemn warning to the very Churches which
St. John now speciallyaddressed(Acts 20:29). St. John saw these principles
and the men who embodied them in full action, and it was an indication for
him of "the last period." So far Christians had only learnt in generalto expect
the personalappearance ofone greatenemy of Christ, the Antichrist. In his
Epistle St. John gives solemn warning that those heretics who denied the God-
Man were not merely precursors of Antichrist, but impersonations of the anti-
Christian principle — eachof them in a true sense an antichrist. The term is
used by no other sacredwriter, by St. John him selfonly five times (1 John
2:18, twice, 1 John 2:22; 4:3; 2 John 7), and that specificallyto characterise
heresy denying the incarnation, person, and dignity of Christ as God-Man.
Antichrist is "the liar"; his spirit and teaching is a lie pure and simple. The
one Antichrist, whose coming was stamped into the living tradition of the
early Church, and of whom believers had necessarily"heard," is clearly
distinguished from many who were already in existence, and were closely
connectedwith him in spirit. Probably St. John expectedthe chief Antichrist,
the "theologicalantagonistofChrist," before the PersonalAdvent. In 2
Thessalonians 2 we find the same idea of a singular individual of preeminent
wickedness, while St. Paul does not call the "Manof Sin" Antichrist. In the
Apocalypse (13-17)a delineation of an anti-Christian power; in St. Paul and in
St. John's Epistles of the "eximious anti-Christian person.
(Bp. Wm. Alexander.)

Antichrist and antichrists
James Morgan, D. D.
It is a dangerous voyage which every Christian sails upon the sea of life.
Sunken rocks, deceitfulcurrents, and boisterous winds endanger his brittle
bark. He needs constantlyto beware that he makes not shipwreck of his faith.
Here we are calledto considerthe danger arising from the seduction of false
teachers. In the early Church these were the source of constantdisquietude.
Nor is it otherwise yet. It is melancholy to observe how little they are feared.
Many trifle with them.
1. The apostle addresses himselfto believers under the title of "little
children." There is a peculiar propriety in using such language to those who
are warned. Little children need to be warned. They are ignorant and
unsuspecting, because they are inexperienced. When they are tempted they
possesslittle powerof resistance. And once betrayed they have neither the
skill nor the power to deliver themselves out of the evils into which they have
been betrayed. It is to be lamented that in all these respects many Christians
bear a strong resemblance to little children.
2. To these the apostle says, "It is the last time," and this is an appropriate
introduction to the warning he was about to give them. The meaning of the
phrase will be seenby citing the parallel passagein Hebrews 1:1. The last time
is therefore the day of Christ. It is the age of Christianity. And there are two
views in which it may be appropriately so denominated. It is the last economy
viewed in its historical relation to those which have preceded it. And it may be
calledso also in relation to the future. There will be no other economy. "Then
cometh the end, when Christ shall have delivered up the kingdom to God the
Father." It is a high privilege that we live under an economywhich is the
completion, the perfection of all that went before it. But we must not forget we
shall have no higher privileges than those which we now enjoy. If we are not
savedby means of those we have we must perish.
3. Thus introduced, the apostle begins to announce his warning, "Ye have
heard that antichrist shall come." The very name is sufficient to awakendeep
concern. We are at once given to understand that we must see a grand

opponent to Him whom we delight to honour, and in whom is all our
confidence. ForHis sake andour own, such an announcement should awaken
our timely fear. As for Him, we cannotdoubt his ability to overcome every
enemy. But we may well fear for ourselves.
4. The apostle, however, comes closerto the case ofthose little children whom
he addressed, and says, "Evennow are there many antichrists." Observe the
distinction betweenthis statement and the former one. The former is a
prophecy, the latter is a fact. Antichrist shall come, but he has not yet been
revealed. Time will be required for his development. But there are other
forms of evil and other seducers who exist now. You are not to imagine that
you are safe because the greatantichrist has not yet appeared. The leavenwas
working which would in time corrupt the mass of professors,so insidious and
dangerous is error; and so necessaryit is to watchits first rise and destroy it
at the bud. In our own day we may well cry with the apostles, "There are
many antichrists." And who or what are they? They are all persons and
things that are opposedto Christ and His people and His cause. And how can
they be enumerated? Infidelity is antichrist, and pours contempt upon the
truth. The scofferis antichrist, and scorns the truth. All ungodly men are
antichrists, and while they resistthe truth themselves they tempt others to
deny it. All errorists are antichrists, and obscure and oppose the truth.
5. The apostle applies this announcement of many antichrists to a practical
use, saying in the next clause, "Wherebywe know that it is the lasttime." The
words amount to a declarationthat this mighty host with all their enmity to
the truth should be a marked and prominent feature in the Christian era.
Christianity is the best economy, and therefore it is the most hated and
opposedby the wickedone.
6. We should beware that we are not found among these antichrists. And for
our warning and guidance a description of them is given in the 19th verse —
"they went out from us." Once they belonged to the Church of Christ. They
apostatisedfrom the faith and practice of the gospel. "But they were not of
us," adds the apostle. Theynever were. "Theyare not all Israelthat are of
Israel." Theymay have professedthe faith, but in reality they had never
embracedit. "For," says he, "had they been of us, they would no doubt have

continued with us." This is certain. The nature of the Divine life makes it so.
"The just shall live by faith." The apostle concludes, "Butthey went out, that
they might be made manifest they were not all of us." On the whole, it was
better they departed. It was better for themselves, that they may not be
deceivedby a name, but be led to penitence. It was better for others, that they
might not be a burthen and hindrance to those with whom they were
associated. And it was better for the cause of religion, that it might not be
scandalisedby their inconsistencies.
(James Morgan, D. D.)
They went out from us, but they were not of us
Anti-Christian
S. E. Pierce.
I. WHERE COULD THESE APOSTATES GO OUT FROM BUT THE
CHURCH? If they had not been in it they could not have gone out from it.
The Church they went out of was the true Church of Christ, in which the true
and everlasting gospelwas preached. And these persons had professedtheir
faith in all the essentialtruths of the gospel. Yettheir ambitious spirits were
such they could not be content but they must bring in another gospel,
contrary to what the apostles preached, pretending to have greaterlight into
truth, and what they calledthe PersonofChrist, and grace, than the very
apostles themselves. Theyturned their back on Christ, His gospel, His
ordinances, His apostles, His Churches, and everything belonging unto Him,
and framed out of their own errors, heresies, whims, and fancies, a Christ and
gospelfor themselves. The apostle assigns the reasonwhy they went out from
the Churches in the way and manner they did — it was because they were not
of one heart and soul with the Churches in the truth. As it was then, so it has
been ever since. All the heresies whichhave tormented the Churches of
Christ, down even to our present times, have originated from persons who
have been in the Churches, who have departed from the Churches. From such
as have made schisms and divisions in the Churches; and when any old error

is newly revived, it in generalsprings from such persons as are disaffectedto
the true Churches of Jesus Christ.
II. HOW THE APOSTLE CONFIRMS HIS ASSERTION — "Forif they had
been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us." How solemn! how
awful! These antichrists came out of the apostolicalChurch of Jesus. They
had been in it. It answeredtheir end for a seasonto remain in the Churches to
whom they had given in their names. It suited them to leave these Churches at
such seasons;when they could, to distil their pernicious influences, as they
thought and hoped, it would gain converts to them. These heretics left the
Churches because they were not of them, only nominally. They might, and
undoubtedly did, boastof superior light to all others in the doctrines of grace.
They were slaves to their own lusts. They were covetous. Theywere greedyof
reward. They were full of gainsaying.
III. WHY THESE ANTICHRISTS WENT OUT OF THE CHURCH. It was
that they might be made manifest, that they did not belong to the Church of
Christ, let them make their boastof the same as they might. This was their
end for their going out, but it was the Lord's end in thrusting them out, and it
might be some of these might have been thrust out by apostolic and also by
Church authority. In the holy and secretmystery of the Lord's providence it
was evidencedthey were not the Lord's beloved ones.
(S. E. Pierce.)
COMMENTARIES
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
2:1,2 When have an Advocate with the Father; one who has undertaken, and
is fully able, to plead in behalf of every one who applies for pardon and
salvationin his name, depending on his pleading for them. He is Jesus, the
Saviour, and Christ, the Messiah, the Anointed. He alone is the Righteous

One, who receivedhis nature pure from sin, and as our Surety perfectly
obeyed the law of God, and so fulfilled all righteousness. All men, in every
land, and through successive generations, are invited to come to God through
this all-sufficient atonement, and by this new and living way. The gospel, when
rightly understood and received, sets the heart againstall sin, and stops the
allowedpractice of it; at the same time it gives blessedrelief to the wounded
consciencesofthose who have sinned.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
And he is the propitiation for our sins - The word rendered "propitiation"
(ἱλασμός hilasmos) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, exceptin 1
John 4:10 of this Epistle; though words of the same derivation, and having the
same essentialmeaning, frequently occur. The corresponding word
ἱλαστήριονhilastērion occurs in Romans 3:25, rendered "propitiation" -
"whom God hath setforth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood;"
and in Hebrews 9:5, rendered mercy-seat- "shadowing the mercy-seat." The
verb ἱλάσκομαι hilaskomaioccurs also in Luke 18:3 - God be merciful to me a
sinner;" and Hebrews 2:17 - "to make reconciliationfor the sins of the
people." Forthe idea expressedby these words, see the notes at Romans 3:25.
The proper meaning of the word is that of reconciling, appeasing, turning
awayanger, rendering propitious or favorable. The idea is, that there is anger
or wrath, or that something has been done to offend, and that it is needful to
turn awaythat wrath, or to appease.This may be done by a sacrifice, by
songs, by services rendered, or by bloody offerings. So the word is often used
in Homer - Passow. We have similar words in common use, as when we sayof
one that he has been offended, and that something must be done to appease
him, or to turn awayhis wrath. This is commonly done with us by making
restitution; or by an acknowledgment;or by yielding the point in controversy;
or by an expressionof regret; or by different conduct in time to come. But this
idea must not be applied too literally to God; nor should it be explained away.
The essentialthoughts in regard to him, as implied in this word, are:
(1) that his will has been disregarded, and his law violated, and that he has
reasonto be offended with us;

(2) that in that condition he cannot, consistentlywith his perfections, and the
goodof the universe, treat us as if we had not done it;
(3) that it is proper that, in some way, he should show his displeasure at our
conduct, either by punishing us, or by something that shall answerthe same
purpose; and,
(4) that the means of propitiation come in here, and accomplishthis end, and
make it proper that he should treat us as if we had not sinned; that is, he is
reconciled, or appeased, andhis angeris turned away.
This is done, it is supposed, by the death of the Lord Jesus, accomplishing, in
most important respects, whatwould be accomplishedby the punishment of
the offender himself. In regard to this, in order to a proper understanding of
what is accomplished, it is necessaryto observe two things - what is not done,
and what is.
I. There are certainthings which do not enter into the idea of propitiation.
They are such as these:
(a) That it does not change the fact that the wrong was done. That is a fact
which cannot be denied, and he who undertakes to make a propitiation for sin
does not deny it.
(b) It does not change God; it does not make Him a different being from what
He was before; it does not buy Him over to a willingness to show mercy; it
does not change an inexorable being to one who is compassionate andkind.
(c) The offering that is made to secure reconciliationdoes notnecessarily
produce reconciliationin fact. It prepares the way for it on the part of God,
but whether they for whom it is made will be disposedto acceptit is another
question.
When two men are alienatedfrom eachother, you may go to B and say to him
that all obstacles to reconciliationon the part of A are removed, and that he is
disposedto be at peace, but whether B will be willing to be at peace is quite
another matter. The mere fact that his adversary is disposedto be at peace,
determines nothing in regard to his disposition in the matter. So in regardto

the controversybetweenman and God. It may be true that all obstacles to
reconciliationon the part of God are takenaway, and still it may be quite a
separate questionwhether man will be willing to lay aside his opposition, and
embrace the terms of mercy. In itself considered, one does not necessarily
determine the other, or throw any light on it.
II. The amount, then, in regard to the propitiation made for sin is, that it
removes all obstacles to reconciliationon the part of God: it does whateveris
necessaryto be done to maintain the honor of His law, His justice, and His
truth; it makes it consistentfor Him to offer pardon - that is, it removes
whateverthere was that made it necessaryto inflict punishment, and thus, so
far as the word canbe applied to God, it appeases Him, or turns awayHis
anger, or renders Him propitious. This it does, not in respectto producing any
change in God, but in respectto the fact that it removes whateverthere was in
the nature of the case that prevented the free and full offer of pardon. The
idea of the apostle in the passagebefore us is, that when we sin we may be
assuredthat this has been done, and that pardon may now be freely extended
to us.
And not for our's only - Not only for the sins of us who are Christians, for the
apostle was writing to such. The idea which he intends to convey seems to be,
that when we come before God we should take the most liberal and large
views of the atonement; we should feel that the most ample provision has been
made for our pardon, and that in no respectis there any limit as to the
sufficiency of that work to remove all sin. It is sufficient for us; sufficient for
all the world.
But also for the sins of the whole world - The phrase "the sins of" is not in the
original, but is not improperly supplied, for the connectiondemands it. This is
one of the expressions occurring in the New Testamentwhich demonstrate
that the atonement was made for all people, and which cannot be reconciled
with any other opinion. If he had died only for a part of the race, this
language could not have been used. The phrase, "the whole world," is one
which naturally embraces all people;is such as would be used if it be
supposedthat the apostle meant to teachthat Christ died for all people;and is
such as cannot be explained on any other supposition. If he died only for the

elect, it is not true that he is the "propitiation for the sins of the whole world"
in any proper sense, norwould it be possible then to assigna sense in which it
could be true. This passage, interpreted in its plain and obvious meaning,
teaches the following things:
continued...
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
2. And he—Greek,"And Himself." He is our all-prevailing Advocate, because
He is Himself "the propitiation"; abstract, as in 1Co 1:30: He is to us all that
is needed for propitiation "in behalf of our sins"; the propitiatory sacrifice,
provided by the Father's love, removing the estrangement, and appeasing the
righteous wrath, on God's part, againstthe sinner. "There is no incongruity
that a father should be offended with that son whom he loveth, and at that
time offended with him when he loveth him" [Bishop Pearson]. The only other
place in the New Testamentwhere Greek "propitiation" occurs, is 1Jo 4:10;it
answers in the Septuagint to Hebrew, "caphar," to effectan atonement or
reconciliationwith God; and in Eze 44:29, to the sin offering. In Ro 3:25,
Greek, it is "propitiatory," that is, the mercy seat, orlid of the ark whereon
God, representedby the Shekinahglory above it, met His people, represented
by the high priest who sprinkled the blood of the sacrifice on it.
and—Greek, "yet."
ours—believers:not Jews, in contrastto Gentiles;for he is not writing to Jews
(1Jo 5:21).
also for the sins of the whole world—Christ's "advocacy" is limited to
believers (1Jo 2:1; 1Jo 1:7): His propitiation extends as widely as sin extends:
see on [2640]2Pe 2:1, "denying the Lord that bought them." "The whole
world" cannotbe restrictedto the believing portion of the world (compare
1Jo 4:14; and "the whole world," 1Jo 5:19). "Thou, too, art part of the world,
so that thine heart cannot deceive itself and think, The Lord died for Peter
and Paul, but not for me" [Luther].
Matthew Poole's Commentary

And he is the propitiation for our sins: the adding of these words, shows that
our Lord grounds his intercessionfor pardon of sin unto penitent believers,
upon his having made atonementfor them before; and therefore that he doth
not herein merely supplicate for favour, but (which is the proper business of
an advocate)plead law and right; agreeablyto what is said above, 1Jo 1:9.
And not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world; nor is his
undertaking herein limited to any selectpersons among believers, but he must
be understood to be an Advocate for all, for whom he is effectuallya
Propitiation, i.e. for all that truly believe in him, {Romans 3:25} all the world
over.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
And he is the propitiation for our sins,.... Forthe sins of us who now believe,
and are Jews:
and not for ours only; but for the sins of Old Testamentsaints, and of those
who shall hereafterbelieve in Christ, and of the Gentiles also, signifiedin the
next clause:
but also for the sins of the whole world; the Syriac version renders it, "not for
us only, but also for the whole world"; that is, not for the Jews only, for John
was a Jew, and so were those he wrote unto, but for the Gentiles also. Nothing
is more common in Jewishwritings than to callthe Gentiles "the world"; and
, "the whole world"; and , "the nations of the world" (l); See Gill on ; and the
word "world" is so used in Scripture; see John3:16; and stands opposedto a
notion the Jews have of the Gentiles, that , "there is no propitiation for them"
(m): and it is easyto observe, that when this phrase is not used of the Gentiles,
it is to be understood in a limited and restrained sense;as when they say(n),
"it happened to a certain high priest, that when he went out of the sanctuary, ,
"the whole world" went after him;''
which could only designthe people in the temple. And elsewhere (o)it is said,

"amle ylwk, "the "whole world" has left the Misna, and gone after the
"Gemara";''
which at most canonly intend the Jews;and indeed only a majority of their
doctors, who were conversantwith these writings: and in anotherplace (p),
"amle ylwk, "the whole world" fell on their faces, but Rafdid not fall on his
face;''
where it means no more than the congregation. Once more, it is said (q), when
"R. Simeon ben Gamalielentered (the synagogue), , "the whole world" stood
up before him;''
that is, the people in the synagogue:to which may be added (r),
"when a greatman makes a mourning, , "the whole world" come to honour
him;''
i.e. a great number of persons attend the funeral pomp: and so these phrases, ,
"the whole world" is not divided, or does not dissent (s); , "the whole world"
are of opinion (t), are frequently met with in the Talmud, by which, an
agreementamong the Rabbins, in certain points, is designed;yea, sometimes
the phrase, "all the men of the world" (u), only intend the inhabitants of a city
where a synagogue was, and, at most, only the Jews:and so this phrase, "all
the world", or "the whole world", in Scripture, unless when it signifies the
whole universe, or the habitable earth, is always used in a limited sense, either
for the Roman empire, or the churches of Christ in the world, or believers, or
the presentinhabitants of the world, or a part of them only, Luke 2:1; and so
it is in this epistle, 1 John 5:19; where the whole world lying in wickednessis
manifestly distinguished from the saints, who are of God, and belong not to
the world; and therefore cannot be understood of all the individuals in the
world; and the like distinction is in this text itself, for "the sins of the whole
world" are opposedto "our sins", the sins of the apostle and others to whom
he joins himself; who therefore belongednot to, nor were a part of the whole
world, for whose sins Christ is a propitiation as for theirs: so that this passage
cannot furnish out any argument for universal redemption; for besides these
things, it may be further observed, that for whose sins Christ is a propitiation,

their sins are atoned for and pardoned, and their persons justified from all
sin, and so shall certainly be glorified, which is not true of the whole world,
and every man and womanin it; moreover, Christ is a propitiation through
faith in his blood, the benefit of his propitiatory sacrifice is only receivedand
enjoyed through faith; so that in the event it appears that Christ is a
propitiation only for believers, a characterwhich does not agree with all
mankind; add to this, that for whom Christ is a propitiation he is also an
advocate, 1 John 2:1; but he is not an advocate for every individual person in
the world; yea, there is a world he will not pray for John 17:9, and
consequentlyis not a propitiation for them. Once more, the design of the
apostle in these words is to comfort his "little children" with the advocacyand
propitiatory sacrifice ofChrist, who might fall into sin through weaknessand
inadvertency; but what comfort would it yield to a distressedmind, to be told
that Christ was a propitiation not only for the sins of the apostles and other
saints, but for the sins of every individual in the world, even of these that are
in hell? Would it not be natural for persons in such circumstances to argue
rather against, than for themselves, and conclude that seeing persons might be
damned notwithstanding the propitiatory sacrifice ofChrist, that this might,
and would be their case.In what sense Christis a propitiation; see Gill on
Romans 3:25. The Jews have no notion of the Messiahas a propitiation or
atonement; sometimes they say (w) repentance atones for all sin; sometimes
the death of the righteous (x); sometimes incense (y); sometimes the priests'
garments (z); sometimes it is the day of atonement (a); and indeed they are in
the utmost puzzle about atonement; and they even confess in their prayers (b),
that they have now neither altar nor priest to atone for them; See Gill on 1
John 4:10.
(l) Jarchi in Isaiah53.5. (m) T. Hieros. Nazir, fol. 57. 3. Vid. T. Bab. Succa, fol.
55. 2.((n) T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 71. 2.((o) T. Bab. Bava Metzia, fol. 33. 2.((p) T.
Bab. Megilla, fol. 22. 2.((q) T. Bab. Horayot, fol. 13. 2.((r) Piske Toseph.
Megilla, art. 104. (s)T. Bab. Cetubot, fol. 90. 2. & Kiddushin, fol. 47. 2. & 49.
1. & 65. 2. & Gittin, fol. 8. 1. & 60. 2.((t) T. Bab. Kiddushin, fol. 48. 1.((u)
Maimon. Hilch. Tephilla, c. 11. sect. 16. (w) Zohar in Lev. fol. 29. 1.((x) Ib. fol.
24. 1. T. Hieros. Yoma, fol. 38. 2.((y) T. Bab. Zebachim, fol. 88. 2. & Erachin,
fol. 16. 1.((z) T. Bab. Zebachim, ib. T. Hieros. Yoma, fol. 44. 2.((a) T. Bab.

Yoma, fol. 87. 1. & T. Hieros. Yoma, fol. 45. 2, 3.((b) SederTephillot, fol. 41. 1.
Ed. Amsterd.
Geneva Study Bible
And he is the {b} propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for
the sins of the {c} whole world.
(b) Reconciliationand intercessiongo together, to give us to understand that
he is both advocate and high priest.
(c) For men of all sorts, of all ages, andall places, so that this benefit being not
to the Jews only, of whom he speaks as appears in 1Jo 2:7 but also to other
nations.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary
1 John 2:2. καὶ αὐτός = et ipse, idemque ille; καί is here also the simple
copula, and is not to be resolvedeither into quia (a Lapide) or nam.
αὐτός refers back to Ἰησ. Χριστὸν δίκαιον, and the epithet δίκαιονis not to be
lost sight of here; Paulus, contrary to the context, refers αὐτός to God.
ἱλασμός ἐστι] The word ἱλασμός, which is used besides in the N. T. only in
chap. 1 John 4:10, and here also indeed in combination with περὶ τῶν ἁμ.
ἡμῶν, may, according to Ezekiel44:27 (= ‫ַח‬ ‫ָּט‬ ‫,)תא‬ mean the sin-offering (Lücke,
3d ed.), but is here to be takenin the sense of ‫ִּכ‬ ‫כ‬ֻּ‫ר‬ִ‫,ִכ‬ Leviticus 25:9, Numbers
5:8, and no doubt in this way, that Christ is calledthe ἱλασμός, inasmuch as
He has expiated by His αἷμα the guilt of sin. This reference to the sacrificial
blood of Christ, it is true, is not demanded by the idea ἱλασμός in itself,[84]
but certainly is demanded by the context, as the apostle canonly ascribe to the
blood of Christ, in chap. 1 John 1:7, the cleansing powerof which he is there
speaking, becausehe knows that reconciliationis based in it.

[84] In the Septuagintnot only does ἱλασμός appear as the translationof the
Hebrew ‫ס‬ ‫ִּתט‬ ‫חכ‬ ָ‫ה‬ (Psalm 129:4; Daniel9:9), but ἱλάσκεσθαι is also used = to be
merciful, to forgive (Psalm65:4; Psalm 78:38;Psalm 79:9),—quite without
reference to an offering.—The explanationof Paulus, however:“He (i.e. God)
is the pure exercise ofcompassiononaccountof sinful faults,” is not
justifiable, because, in the first place, God is not the subject, and secondly, the
ἱλασμός of Christ is not the forgiveness itself, but is that which procures
forgiveness.
REMARK.
In classicalGreek ἱλάσκεσθαι (as middle) is = ἱλεων ποιεῖν; but in scripture it
never appears in this active signification, in which God would not be the
object; but in all the passageswhere the Septuagintmakes use of this word,
whether it is as the translation of ִֻּּ‫פ‬ ‫ִכ‬ (Psalm 65:4; Psalm 78:38;Psalm79:9),
or of ‫כ‬‫חא‬‫הט‬ (Psalm25:11; 2 Kings 5:18), or of ‫כ‬ ‫תא‬‫םכ‬ (Exodus 32:14), God is the
subject, and sin, or sinful man, is the object; in Hebrews 2:17, Christ is the
subject, and the objectalso is τὰς ἁμαρτίας.The case is almostexactly similar
with ἐξιλάσκεσθαι, which does not appearin the N. T. at all, but in the O. T.,
on the other hand, is used as the translation of ִֻּּ‫פ‬ ‫ִכ‬ much more frequently than
the simple form; it is only where this verb is used of the relationbetweenmen,
namely Genesis 32:21 and Proverbs 16:14, that the classicalusus loquendi is
preserved; but elsewhere with ἐξιλάσκεσθαι, whetherthe subject be God (as
in Ezekiel16:63)or man, especiallythe priest, the objectis either man
(Leviticus 4:20; Leviticus 4:26; Leviticus 6:7; Leviticus 16:6; Leviticus 16:11;
Leviticus 16:16-17;Leviticus 16:24;Leviticus 16:30;Leviticus 16:33; Ezekiel
45:17)or sin (Exodus 32:30; both together, Leviticus 5:18, Numbers 6:11), or
even of holiness defiled by sin (the most holy place, Leviticus 16:16;the altar,
Leviticus 16:18; Leviticus 27:33, Ezekiel43:22);only in Zechariah7:2 is
found ἐξιλάσκασθαι τὸν κύριον, where, however, the Hebrew text has ‫ַחח‬‫תא‬ ָ‫ח‬
‫טס‬‫ת‬‫ס־‬ִָּ ִִּּ‫ם‬ ָ‫חֹפ‬ ַָ. Ἰλασμός, therefore, in scripture does not denote the reconciliation

of God, either with Himself or with men, and hence not placatio (or as
Myrberg interprets: propitiatio) Dei, but the justification or reconciliationof
the sinner with God, because it is never statedin the N. T. that God is
reconciled, but rather that we are reconciledto God.[85]
[85] Comp. Delitzschin his Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, on
chap. 1 John 2:17, p. 94 ff. But it is to be noticed that Delitzsch, while he states
correctlythe Biblical mode of representation, bases his opening discussionon
the idea of the “self-reconciliationof the Godheadwith itself,” an idea which
is not containedin scripture.—It is observedby severalcommentators that
ἱλασμός, as distinguished from καταλλαγή = “Versöhnung” (reconciliation), is
to be translatedby “Sühnung” or “Versühnung” (both = Engl. expiation,
atonement). It is true, Versöhnung and Versühnung are properly one and the
same word, but in the usage of the language the distinction has certainly been
fixed that the latter word denotes the restorationof the disturbed relationship
by an expiation to be performed; only it is inexactto assertthat the idea
ἱλασμός in itself contains the idea of punishment, since ἱλάσκισθαι does not
include this idea either in classicalorin Biblicalusage, and ἐξιλάσκεσθαι,
though mostly indeed used in the O. T. in reference to a sacrifice by which sin
is covered, is also used without this reference (comp. Sir 3:28).
Grotius, S. G. Lange, and others take ἱλασμός = ἱλαστήρ;of course that
abstractform denotes the personal Christ, but by this change into the
concrete the expression of the apostle loses its peculiar character;“the
abstractis more comprehensive, more intensive; comp. 1 Corinthians 1:30”
(Brückner); it gives it to be understood “that Christ is not the propitiator
through anything outside Himself, but through Himself” (Lücke, 2d ed.), and
that there is no propitiation exceptthrough Him.[86]
The relation of ἰλασμός to the preceding παράκλητονmay be variously
regarded;either παράκλητος is the higher idea, in which ἱλασμός is contained,

Bede:advocatum habemus apud Patremqui interpellat pro nobis et
propitium eum ac placatum peccatis nostris reddit; or conversely:ἱλασμός is
the higher idea, to which the advocacyis subordinated, as de Wette thus says:
“ἱλασμός does not merely refer to the sacrificialdeath of Jesus, but, as the
more generalidea, includes the intercessionas the progressive reconciliation”
(so also Rickli, Frommann); or lastly, both ideas are co-ordinate with one
another, Christ being the ἱλασμίς in regardto His blood which was shed, and
the παράκλητος,onthe other hand, in regard to His presentactivity with the
Father for those who are reconciledto Godthrough His blood. Against the
first view is the sentence beginning with καὶ αὐτός, by which ἱλασμός is
marked as an idea which is not alreadycontained in the idea παράκλητος,but
is distinct from it; againstthe secondview it is decisive that the propitiation,
which Christ is describedas, has reference to all sins, but His intercession, on
the other hand, has reference only to the sins of the believers who belong to
Him. There remains, accordingly, only the third view as the only correct one
(so also Braune). The relationship is this, that the intercessionofthe glorified
Christ has as its presupposition the ἱλασμός wrought out in His death,[87]yet
the sentence καὶ αὐτός is not merely added, ut causa reddatur, cur Christus sit
advocatus noster(Hornejus, and similarly Beza, Lorinus, Sander, etc.), for its
independence is thereby takenaway;the thought containedin it not merely
serves for the explanation or confirmation of the preceding, but it is also full
of meaning in itself, as it brings out the relation of Christ to the whole world
of sinners.
περὶ πῶν ἁμαρτιῶνἡμῶν]περί expressesthe reference quite generally: “in
regard to;” it may here be observedthat ἐξιλάσκεσθαι, in the LXX. is usually
construed with περί, after the Hebrew ‫ראחִכ‬ ִֻּּ‫.פ‬ The idea of substitution is not
suggestedin περί.
Expositor's Greek Testament
1 John 2:2. Our Advocate does not plead that we are innocent or adduce
extenuating circumstances. He acknowledgesourguilt and presents His
vicarious work as the ground of our acquittal. He stands in the Court of

Heaven ἀρνίον ὡς ἐσφαγμένον(Revelation5:6) and the marks of His sore
Passionare a mute but eloquent appeal: “I suffered all this for sinners, and
shall it go for naught?” περὶ ὃλου τοῦ κόσμου, Proverbs totius mundi
(Vulgate), “for the sins of the whole world”. This is grammatically possible (cf.
Matthew 5:20), but it misses the point. There are sins, specialand occasional,
in the believer; there is sin in the world; it is sinful through and through. The
Apostle means “for our sins and that mass of sin, the world”. Cf. Rothe:“Die
‘Welt’ ist ihrem Begriff zufolge überhaupt sündig, ein Sündenmasse, und hat
nicht blos einzelne Sünden an sich”. The remedy is commensurate with the
malady. Bengel:“Quam late patet peccatum, tam late propitiatio”.
Observe how the Apostle classeshimself with his readers:“we have,” “our
sins”—a rebuke of priestcraft. Cf. Aug.: “But some one will say: ‘Do not holy
men pray for us? Do not bishops and prelates pray for the people?’ Nay,
attend to the Scriptures, and see that even the prelates commend themselves
to the people. For the Apostle says to the common folk ‘withal praying for us’.
The Apostle prays for the folk, the folk for the Apostle. We pray for you,
brethren; but pray ye also for us. Let all the members pray for one another,
let the Head intercede for all.”
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
2. And He is the propitiation] Or, And He Himself is a propitiation: there is no
article in the Greek. Note the present tense throughout; ‘we have an
Advocate, He is a propitiation’: this condition of things is perpetual, it is not
something which took place once for all long ago. In His glorified Body the
Son is ever acting thus. Contrast‘He laid down His life for us’ (1 John 3:16).
Beware ofthe unsatisfactoryexplanationthat ‘propitiation’ is the abstractfor
the concrete, ‘propitiation’ (ἱλασμός)for ‘propitiator’ (ἱλαστήρ). Had S. John
written ‘propitiator’ we should have lost half the truth; viz. that our Advocate
propitiates by offering Himself. He is both High Priest and Victim, both
Propitiator and Propitiation. It is quite obvious that He is the former; the
office of Advocate includes it. It is not at all obvious that He is the latter: very
rarely does an advocate offerhimself as a propitiation.

The word for ‘propitiation’ occurs nowhere in N. T. but here and in 1 John
4:10; in both places without the article and followedby ‘for our sins’. It
signifies any actionwhich has expiation as its object, whether prayer,
compensation, or sacrifice. Thus ‘the ram of the atonement’ (Numbers 5:8) is
‘the ram of the propitiation’ or ‘expiation’, where the same Greek wordas is
used here is used in the LXX. Comp. Ezekiel44:27;Numbers 29:11; Leviticus
25:9. The LXX. of ‘there is forgiveness with Thee’(Psalm 130:4)is
remarkable:literally rendered it is ‘before Thee is the propitiation’ (ὁ
ἱλασμός). So also the Vulgate, apud Te propitiatio est. And this is the idea that
we have here: Jesus Christ, as being righteous, is ever presentbefore the Lord
as the propitiation. With this we should compare the use of the cognate verb
in Hebrews 2:17 and cognate substantive Romans 3:25 and Hebrews 9:5.
From these passagesit is clearthat in N. T. the word is closelyconnectedwith
that specialform of expiation which takes place by means of an offering or
sacrifice, althoughthis idea is not of necessityincluded in the radical
significationof the word itself. See notes in all three places.
for our sins] Literally, concerning (περἱ) our sins: our sins are the matter
respecting which the propitiation goes on. This is the common form of
expressionin LXX. Comp. Numbers 29:11; Exodus 30:15-16;Exodus 32:30;
Leviticus 4:20; Leviticus 4:26; Leviticus 4:31; Leviticus 4:35, &c. &c.
Similarly, in John 8:46, ‘Which of you convictethMe of sin?’ is literally,
‘Which of you convictethMe concerning sin?’ Comp. John 16:8; John 10:33.
Notice that it is ‘our sins’, not ‘our sin’: the sins which we are daily
committing, and not merely the sinfulness of our nature, are the subject of the
propitiation.
and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world] More literally,
but also for the whole world: ‘the sins of’ is not repeatedin the Greek and is
not neededin English. Once more we have a parallel with the Gospel, and
especiallywith chap. 17. ‘Neither for these only do I pray, but for them also

that shall believe on Me through their word … that the world may believe that
Thou didst send Me … that the world may know that Thou didst send Me,
and lovedstthem, even as Thou lovedstMe’ (John 17:20-23):‘Behold, the
Lamb of God, which takethawaythe sin of the world’ (John 1:29): ‘We know
that this is indeed the Saviour of the world’ (John 4:24). Comp. 1 John 4:14. S.
John’s writings are so full of the fundamental opposition betweenChrist or
believers and the world, that there was dangerlest he should seemto give his
sanctionto a Christian exclusiveness as fatalas the Jewishexclusiveness outof
which he and other converts from Judaism had been delivered. Therefore by
this (note especially‘the whole world’) and other plain statements both in
Gospel(see John 11:51 in particular) and Epistle he insists that believers have
no exclusive right to the merits of Christ. The expiatory offering was made for
the whole world without limitation. All who will may profit by it: quam late
peccatum, tam late propitiatio (Bengel). The disabilities under which the
whole human race had laboured were removed. It remained to be seenwho
would avail themselves of the restoredprivileges. ‘The world’ (ὁ κόσμος)is
another of S. John’s characteristic expressions. In his writings it generally
means those who are alienatedfrom God, outside the pale of the Church. But
we should fall into grievous error if we assignedthis meaning to the word
indiscriminately. Thus, in ‘the world was made by Him’ (John 1:10) it means
‘the universe’; in ‘This is of a truth the Prophet that comethinto the world’
(John 6:14) it means ‘the earth’; in ‘God so loved the world’ (John 3:16) it
means, as here, ‘the inhabitants of the earth, the human race’. But still the
prevalent meaning in both Gospeland Epistle is a bad one; ‘those who have
not acceptedthe Christ, unbelievers.’In the Apocalypse it occurs only thrice,
once in the usual sense, ‘The kingdom of the world is become the kingdom of
our Lord’ (John 11:15), and twice in the sense of ‘the universe’ (John 13:8,
John 17:8).
Bengel's Gnomen
1 John 2:2. Αὐτὸς, He Himself) This word forms an Epitasis [See Append. on
this figure]: a most powerful Advocate, because He Himself is the
propitiation.—ἰλασμός ἐστι, is the propitiation) The word ἰλασμός, and
ἐξιλασμὸς, is of frequent occurrence in the Septuagint: it denotes a
propitiatory sacrifice:ch. 1 John 4:10; comp. 2 Corinthians 5:21 : that is, the

Saviour Himself. There had been therefore enmity (offence)betweenGod and
sinners.—ἡμῶν, ofus) the faithful. There is no reference here to the Jews;for
he is not writing to the Jews:ch. 1 John 5:21.—περὶ ὅλου) respecting (for) the
sins of the whole world. If he had said only, of the world, as ch. 1 John 4:14,
the whole must have been understood: now, since of the whole is expressed,
who dares to put any restrictionupon it? ch. 1 John 5:19. The propitiation is
as widely extended as sin.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 2. - And he (not quia nor enim, but idemque ille) is a Propitiation for
our sins. Ἱλασμός occurs here and chapter 1 John 4:10 only in the New
Testament. St. Paul's word is καταλλαγή (Romans 5:11;Romans 11:15; 2
Corinthians 5:18, 19). They are not equivalents; ἱλασμός has reference to the
one party to be propitiated, καταλλαγή to the two parties to be reconciled.
Ἀπολύτρωσις is a third word expressing yet another aspectof the atonement -
the redemption of the offending party by payment of his debt (Romans 3:24,
etc.). Although ἱλασμός does not necessarilyinclude the idea of sacrifice, yet
the use of the word in the LXX, and of ἱλάσκεσθαι (Hebrews 2:27) and
ἱλαστήριον(Romans 3:25; Hebrews 9:5) in the New Testament, points to the
expiation wrought by the great High Priestby the sacrifice ofhimself. It is
ἱλασμός, and not ἱλαστήρ, because the prominent fact is Christ as an Offering
rather than as One who offers. With the περί, cf. John 8:46; John 10:33;John
16:8. Our sins are the subject-matter of his propitiatory work. And not for
ours only, but also for those of the whole world. Again we seemto have an
echo of the prayer of the greatHigh Priest (John 17:20, 24). The propitiation
is for all, not for the first band of believers only. The sins of the whole world
are expiated; and if the expiation does not effectthe salvationof the sinner, it
is because he rejects it, loving the darkness ratherthan the light (John 3:19).
No man - Christian, Jew, or Gentile - is outside the mercy of God, unless he
places himself there deliberately. "It seems clearthat the sacrifice of Christ,
though peculiarly and completely available only for those who were called,
does in some particulars benefit the whole world, and releaseit from the evil
in which the whole creationwas travailing" (Jelf).
Vincent's Word Studies

And He (καὶ αὐτὸς)
The He is emphatic: that same Jesus:He himself.
The propitiation (ἱλασμός)
Only here and 1 John 4:10. From ἱλάσκομαι to appease, to conciliate to one's
self, which occurs Luke 18:13; Hebrews 2:17. The noun means originally an
appeasing or propitiating, and passes, through Alexandrine usage, into the
sense ofthe means of appeasing, as here. The constructionis to be particularly
noted; for, in the matter of (περί) our sins; the genitive case ofthat for which
propitiation is made. In Hebrews 2:17, the accusative case,also ofthe sins to
be propitiated. In classicalusage, onthe other hand, the habitual construction
is the accusative (directobjective case), ofthe personpropitiated. So in
Homer, of the gods. Θεὸν ἱλάσκεσθαι is to make a God propitious to one. See
"Iliad," i., 386, 472. Ofmen whom one wishes to conciliate by divine honors
after death. So Herodotus, of Philip of Crotona. "His beauty gained him
honors at the hands of the Egestaeans whichthey never accordedto any one
else;for they raised a hero-temple over his grave, and they still propitiate him
(αὐτὸνἱλάσκονται) with sacrifices" (v., 47). Again, "The Parians, having
propitiated Themistocles (Θεμιστοκλέαἱλασάμενοι) with gifts, escapedthe
visits of the army" (viii., 112). The change from this construction shows, to
quote Canon Westcott, "thatthe scriptural conceptionof the verb is not that
of appeasing one who is angry, with a personal feeling, againstthe offender;
but of altering the characterof that which, from without, occasionsa
necessaryalienation, and interposes an inevitable obstacle to fellowship. Such
phrases as 'propitiating God,' and God 'being reconciled'are foreign to the
language ofthe New Testament. Manis reconciled(2 Corinthians 5:18 sqq.;
Romans 5:10 sq.). There is a propitiation in the matter of the sin or of the
sinner."
For the sins of the whole world (περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου)
The sins of (A. V., italicized) should be omitted; as in Revelation, for the whole
world. Compare 1 John 4:14; John 4:42; John 7:32. "The propitiation is as
wide as the sin" (Bengel). If men do not experience its benefit, the fault is not
in its efficacy. Dsterdieck(citedby Huther) says, "The propitiation has its real

efficacyfor the whole world; to believers it brings life, to unbelievers death."
Luther: "It is a patent fact that thou too art a part of the whole world; so that
thine heart cannot deceive itself, and think, the Lord died for Peterand Paul,
but not for me." On κόσμου see onJohn 1:9.
END OF BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
THE GREATEST SACRIFICEBY GLENN PEASE
One of my favorite poets is William L. Stidger, and I want to begin this
messagewith one of his poems.
I SAW GOD WASH THE WORLD
I saw God washthe world lastnight With his sweetshowers onhigh, And
then, when morning came, I saw Him hang it out to dry.
He washedeachtiny blade of grass And every trembling tree; He flung his
showers againstthe hill,
And sweptthe billowing sea.
The white rose is a cleanerwhite, The red rose is more red, Since God washed
every fragrant face And put them all to bed.
There's not a bird, there's not a bee That wings along the way But is a cleaner
bird and bee Than it was yesterday.
I saw God washthe world lastnight. Ah, would He had washedme As cleanof
all my dust and dirt As that old white birch tree.
We know it was not dust and dirt that he longed to have cleaned, for he did
not need God’s help to washthat off. He could have takena bath or a shower,
or even jumped into a lake to achieve that goal. What he is longing for is the
universal desire to be forgiven and cleansedfrom the dirt of the soul so that he
could be free from all guilt for his sins. The goodnews is that God has made
this possible. He did not do it lastnight, and He did not do it by means of rain.

He did it at Calvary by means of the sacrifice ofHis Son. We used to sing the
old hymns that went-What can washawaymy sin? Nothing but the blood of
Jesus, and Washme and I shall be whiter than snow. I have written what
Stidger could have written
I saw God washthe world that day When His Son died on the cross. His Son
Jesus had hell to pay To spare us eternalloss.
He shed His blood for all sinners, Now all can be forgiven. In Him we all can
be winners, Living foreverin heaven.
It was the greatestsacrifice Thatany had ever made. Forcleansing sin it did
suffice All our debt has now been paid.
I saw God washthe world that day When He gave His Son to die. He washed
all of our sin away, And from guilt did purify.
That is what Heb. 1:3 is saying by the phrase, “After He had provided
purification for sins….” Thatis when He ascendedand sat down at the right
hand of the Majestyin heaven. Jesus accomplishedHis goalfor coming to
earth when He died for the sins of the world, and by that sacrifice made it
possible for any who put their trust in Him to be cleansedand made fit to join
Him in the presence ofGod forever. There has never been a sacrifice that
achievedso much for so many. History is filled with sacrificesthat have saved
the earthly lives of many people, but never has their been another sacrifice
that cleansedfrom sin and saved people for all eternity. Jesus has no
competition in this area, for there are none who even claim that they have
been able to make it possible for all sin to be forgiven by their sacrifice. Jesus
is the greatestin every area where He competes, but in this area there are no
competitors, and so His is the greatest sacrificein the universe.
If you study the word sacrifice in the New Testamentyou will discoverthat
the book of Hebrews uses the word more than all the rest of the New
Testamenttogether. The Hebrew Christians it is written to have grown up all
their lives going to the temple and depending upon the sacrifice ofanimals
and the ministry of the priests and high priest. It is the only sacrifice they
knew, and they neededto be educatedin understanding the once for all

sacrifice ofJesus that did away with all that was basic to their Old Testament
faith. Once they could grasphow superior this sacrifice was they could let go
of the old without fear and anxiety that they were forsaking the plan of God.
Hebrews does recognize that the old systemwas God’s plan at the time, but
that in Christ there is a better and complete plan. In Heb. 9:23 we read, “It
was necessary, then, for the copies ofthe heavenly things to be purified with
these sacrifices,but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than
these.” Thenhe goes onto say in verse 26, “But now he has appeared once for
all at the end of the ages to do awaywith sin by the sacrifice ofhimself.” In
10:10 we read, “…we have been made holy through the sacrifice ofthe body
of Jesus Christ once for all.” The in 10:11-12 we read, “Dayafter day every
priest stands and performs his religious duties; againand again he offers the
same sacrifices,whichcan never take away sins. But when this priest had
offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he satdown at the right hand of
God.” Hebrews is making it clearthat the once for all sacrifice ofJesus onthe
cross was greaterthan all the billions of animals that have been sacrificedfor
atoning for sin. All of them togetherdid not cleanse from a single sin, but His
once for all sacrifice made it possible for every sin to be cleansed. It was,
without a doubt, the greatestsacrifice ever.
The author of Hebrews is trying to prevent the Hebrew Christians from
going back to their old trust in the temples sacrifices.Theyare suffering for
becoming Christians and there is a temptation to go back to what was safe
and escape the persecutionthey had to endure by becoming Christians. He is
trying to make the point that it is better to suffer in following Christ and being
loyal to Him than to go back to what will not cleanse fromsin and make them
acceptable to God. Change has been hard on them, and costly, but it is worth
any price they have to pay to gain the eternal benefits of the sacrifice ofJesus.
They have to suffer by their choice to be loyal to Jesus, but it is still better
than continuing in the old system that does not work, for that is fatal. No
number of animal sacrificeswill make them acceptable to God.
An ideal example of what their conflict was all about is the agony of defeat
video seenby millions on “The Wide World of Sports” program. The skieris
coming down the jump when all of a sudden he falls off the side and goes

smashing againstthe rail and tumbles down the hill. It looks like he will spend
the restof his life in a wheelchair if he survives this terrible accident. But the
fact is, it was his choice to make that painful fall. He realized half way down
the ramp that he was going too fastand that if he completed the jump he
would land on level ground, and this could be fatal. He had to abort the jump
and take that awful tumble. We see it as the agony of defeat, but he may have
savedhis life by doing it. He suffered only minor injuries by that fall, but may
have ended his life by continuing. Those Hebrews who continued to trust in
the sacrifice ofanimals for their sins were risking their lives, but those who
took the tumble of suffering to trust in Jesus alone, and His once for all
sacrifice, were paying a small price for such an ultimate success.It was
preventative suffering, just as it was for that skier. In essence Hebrews is
saying to take the fall for Jesus. Sticking with the old is fatal, but trusting
Jesus is only painful for a time. It may look like the agonyof defeat, but it is
the wayof the greatestwisdomand the greatestsuccess.
The reasonthat the sacrifice ofJesus was the greatesteveris because it is
the only sacrifice that ever worked. All the animal sacrifices just pointed to
the need for blood to be shed and life paid for cleansing from sin. God’s
justice demands that when His law is violated there is a penalty that has to be
paid. The wages ofsin is death, and so that is the penalty that must be paid if
the guilty are to be setfree. Deathcame upon all, for all have sinned and come
short of the glory of God. The only hope would be a substitute who could die
in our place so the penalty would be paid, and we could be free from it, and
not have to pay it with our own lives. Jesus became that substitute and took on
himself the guilt of the whole world. As the perfect Lamb of God he died for
the sins of the world. It is beyond our comprehensionwhy He would do so. We
know He is a God of love and compassion, but it is still hard to comprehend
why He would take our place and suffer the penalty that is rightfully ours. We
need earthly illustrations to help us grasp the wonder of this greatsacrifice.
We geta taste of what God did in this true story that I read about.
“After a few of the usual Sunday evening hymns, the church's preacher
slowlystood up, walkedoverto the pulpit and, before he gave his sermon for
the evening, briefly introduced a guestminister who was in the service that
evening. In the introduction, the preachertold the congregationthat the guest

minister was one of his dearestchildhood friends and that he wanted him to
have a few moments to greetthe church and share whateverhe felt would be
appropriate for the service. With that, an elderly man stepped up to the pulpit
and beganto speak.
"A father, his son, and a friend of his son were sailing off the Pacific
coast,"he began, "Whena fast approaching storm blockedany attempt to get
back to the shore. The waves were so high, that even though the father was an
experiencedsailor, he could not keepthe boat upright and the three were
sweptinto the oceanas the boat capsized." The old man hesitated for a
moment, making eye contactwith two teenagerswho were, for the first time
since the service began, looking somewhatinterestedin his story. The aged
minister continued with his story, "Grabbing a rescue line, the father had to
make the most
excruciating decisionof his life: to which boy he would throw the other end of
the life line. He only had seconds to make the decision. The father knew that
his sonwas a Christian and he also knew that his son's friend was not. The
agonyof his decisioncould not be matched by the torrent of waves. "As the
father yelled out, 'I love you, son!' he threw out the life line to his son's friend.
By the time the father had pulled the friend back to the capsizedboat, his son
had disappearedbeneath the raging swells into the black of night. His body
was never recovered."
“ By this time, the two teenagers were sitting up straight in the pew,
anxiously waiting for the next words to come out of the old minister's mouth.
"The father," he continued, "knew his son would step into eternity with Jesus
and he could not bear the thought of his son's friend stepping into an eternity
without Jesus. Therefore,he sacrificedhis son to save the son's friend. How
greatis the love of God that he should do the same for us. Our heavenly father
sacrificedhis only begottenSon that we could be saved. I urge you to accept
his offer to rescue you and take a hold of the life line he is throwing out to you
in this service." With that, the old man turned and satback down in his chair
as silence filled the room. The preacheragain walkedslowlyto the pulpit and
delivered a brief sermon with an invitation at the end. However, no one
responded to the appeal.

“Within minutes after the service ended, the two teenagers were atthe old
man's side. "Thatwas a nice story," politely statedone of the boys, "but I
don't think it was very realistic for a father to give up his only son's life in
hopes that the other boy would become a Christian." "Well, you've got a point
there," the old man replied, glancing down at his worn bible. A big smile
broadened his narrow face, he once againlookedup at the boys and said, "It
sure isn't very realistic, is it? But I'm standing here today to tell you that
story gives me a glimpse of what it must have been like for God to give up his
son for me. You see --- I was that father and your preacheris my son's
friend."
J. Allen Petersongives this simple illustration: “I read about a small boy
who was consistentlylate coming home from school. His parents warned him
one day that he must be home on time that afternoon, but nevertheless he
arrived later than ever. His mother met him at the door and said nothing.
At dinner that night, the boy lookedat his plate. There was a slice of bread
and a glass ofwater. He lookedathis father’s full plate and then at his father,
but his father remained silent. The boy was crushed. The father waited for the
full impact to sink in, then quietly took the boy’s plate and placedit in front of
himself. He took his own plate of meat and potatoes, put it in front of the boy,
and smiled at his son. When that boy grew to be a man, he said, “All my life
I’ve knownwhat Godis like by what my father did that night.”
Another illustration is in the story of a one-roomschoolhousein the
mountains of Virginia where it was nearly impossible to geta teacherto stay
because ofthe roughness of the boys. No teacherhad been able to handle
them. The teller of this story goes on, “Thenone day an inexperienced young
teacherapplied. He was told that every teacherhad receivedan awful beating,
but the teacheracceptedthe risk. The first day of schoolthe teacheraskedthe
boys to establishtheir own rules and the penalty for breaking the rules. The
class came up with 10 rules, which were written on the blackboard. Then the
teacherasked, 'Whatshall we do with one who breaks the rules?'
"'Beathim across the back ten times without his coaton,' came the response.

"A day or so later, . . . the lunch of a big student, named Tom, was stolen. 'The
thief was located-a little hungry fellow, about ten years old.'
"As Little Jim came up to take his licking, he pleaded to keephis coaton.
'Take your coatoff,' the teachersaid. 'You helped make the rules!'
"The boy took off the coat. He had no shirt and revealeda bony little crippled
body. As the teacherhesitatedwith the rod, Big Tom jumped to his feet and
volunteered to take the boy's licking.
"'Very well, there is a certain law that one can become a substitute for
another. Are you all agreed?'the teacherasked.
"After five strokes across Tom's back, the rod broke. The class was sobbing.
'Little Jim had reachedup and caught Tom with both arms around his neck.
"Tom, I'm sorry that I stole your lunch, but I was awful hungry. Tom, I will
love you till I die for taking my licking for me! Yes, I will love you forever!'"
This is to be our response to the sacrifice ofJesus in taking our place in
paying the penalty for sin. By so doing he provided purification for sin, or as
some versions have it, “He made an expiation for the sins of men.” Others
have it, “He had effectedour cleansing from sin,” or, “He had brought about
the purgation of sins.” The bottom line is that His sacrifice made it possible
for us to escape the penalty of sin, which is our justification; the power of sin,
which is our sanctification, and the presence ofsin, which is our glorification.
Our complete salvationwas purchased by the greatestsacrificein the
universe, and how can our response be less than that of the little boy who said,
“I will love you forever?”
We may not know, we cannottell, What pains he had to bear, But we believe
it was for us He hung and suffered there.
And because we believe it, we will praise Him foreverfor this great
salvation. He paid an enormous price that we might have everlasting peace.
He was betrayed by Judas. He was denied by Peter. He was abandoned by the
disciples. He was persecutedby the scribes. He was railroadedby the
Pharisees.He was mockedby the priests. He was hated by the chief priest. He

was spat upon and condemned by the crowd. He was scourgedand betrayed
by Pilate. He was crucified by the Romans. He was forsakenby His Father.
The book of Hebrews is written to warn believers not to add to the
suffering of Jesus by trampling under foot the blood of Christ by ignoring and
forsaking sucha great salvation. What Jesus did for us demands a lifetime
commitment of love and loyalty. Nothing is to come betweenus and our
Savior. We are to be faithful unto death, for no sacrifice cancompare with the
sacrifice he made for us. He made the whole universe by merely speaking the
Word, and He sustains the universe by omnipotent power that does not
exhaust Him at all. But the work of atonementfor sin was hard beyond our
comprehension. As the Sonof God Jesus neverhad to work so hard, but as the
Son of Man He had to work harder than any man has ever had to work. He
had to resistall temptation and overcome all evil, and then lay down His
perfect life in sacrifice for all who yield to temptation and submit to all evil.
This calledfor physical, mental and spiritual labor harder than any other
being has ever had to endure. No wonder that His one actof sacrifice was
greaterthan all other sacrifices put together. All others never cleansedone
sin, but His cleansedfor all sin.
This hymn calledthe Akathist Hymn to the Divine Passionof Christ should
be a prayer from the heart of every Christian.
Lord Jesus Christ, Sonof the Living God, Creatorof Heaven and earth,
Savior of the world,
Behold I who am unworthy and of all men most sinful, humbly bow the knee
of my heart before the glory of Thy majesty and praise Thy Cross and
Passion, andoffer thanksgiving to Thee, the King and God of all, that Thou
wastpleasedto bear as man all labours and hardships, all temptations and
tortures, that Thou mightest be our Fellow-suffererand Helper, and a Saviour
to all of us in all our sorrows, needs, and sufferings.
I know, O all-powerful Lord, that all these things were not necessaryforThee,
but for us men and for our salvation Thou dist endure Thy Cross and Passion
that Thou mightest redeem us from all cruel bondage to the enemy.

What, then, shall I give in return to Thee, O Lover of mankind, for all that
Thou hast suffered for me, a sinner? I cannotsay, for soul and body and all
blessings come from Thee, and all that I have is Thine, and I am Thine. Yet I
know that love is repaid only by love. Teachme, then, to love and praise Thee.
Trusting solelyin Thine infinite compassionand mercy, O Lord, I praise
Thine unspeakable patience, I magnify Thine unutterable exhaustion, I glorify
Thy boundless mercy, I adore Thy purest Passion, andmost lovingly kissing
Thy wounds, I cry: Have mercy on me a sinner, and cause that Thy holy Cross
may not be fruitless in me,
that I may participate here with faith in Thy sufferings and be vouchsafedto
behold also the glory of Thy Kingdom in Heaven.
Amen.
The act of atoning for the sins of the world is so significant that it is put in a
list of the greatestthings that canbe listed. Jesus is the heir of all things, and
He is the Creatorof all, and He is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact
representationof God’s being, and he sustains the whole universe, and sits at
the right hand of God. This is the most impressive list you will find anywhere
in the Bible, and in that list is added this one, that He provided purification
for sins. What Jesus did on the cross for us is right up there with the greatest
truths in the universe. It is so big and important that it makes the headlines in
the greatestnewspaperofthe universe. Call it The Trinity Tribune, The
GospelGazette, orthe Heavenly Herald. It is the paper read by all in heaven,
and in bold letters taking up a full page is the story of the angelic reporter
who was assignedto coverthe crucifixion. It is titled I WATCHED GOD
WASH THE WORLD LAST NIGHT. That is what Goddid at Calvary, for
the shed blood of Jesus made atonementfor the sins of the world. The more
we know God, the more we will recognize how important it was in His plan to
provide purification for sin.
Saphir writes with eloquence of what Jesus did by His sacrifice."Whyhas
this wonderful and glorious Being, in whom all things are summed up, and
who is before all things the Father’s delight and the Father’s glory; why has
this infinite light, this infinite power, this infinite majesty come down to our

poor earth? Forwhat purpose? To shine? To show forth the splendor of His
majesty? To teachheavenly wisdom? To rule with just and holy right? No. He
came to purge our sins. What height of glory! what depths of abasement!
Infinite in His majesty, and infinite in His self-humiliation, and in the depths
of His love. What a glorious Lord! And what an awful sacrifice of
unspeakable love, to purge our sins by Himself"! It is no wonders that
Borehamcould not speak too highly of the cross evenwhen he spoke of it as
“the climax of immensities, the centerof infinities, and the conflux of
eternities.” You cannot exaggerate the wonder of and the importance of the
sacrifice ofJesus by which he made possible the cleansing of sin.
It is in ignoring this greatestoftruths about Jesus that the world goes
astray. He was Godin human flesh dying as a substitute for man that man
might be forgiven and cleansedfrom sin and all its consequences.There are so
many willing to acknowledgeJesus as a greatteacher, and even the greatest
teacherto ever live. This sounds good, but the fact is, to stopthere is to be a
fool, for if Jesus was not much more than that, and even God and the Savior
of the world, then he was not a great teacherat all. One of the most often read
quotes on this issue is that of C. S. Lewis. Let me share it again, for it gets to
the point that is crucial.
"Jesus toldpeople that their sins were forgiven. This only makes sense if He
really was the God whose laws are brokenand whose love is
wounded in every sin. I am trying here to prevent the really foolishthing that
people often sayabout Him: ‘I am ready to acceptJesus as a greatmoral
teacher, but I don’t acceptHis claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must
not say. A man who was merely a man who said the sortof things Jesus said
would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on a level
with the man who says he is a poachedegg - or else he would be the Devil of
Hell. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a
demon; or you can fall at His feet and callHim Lord and God. But let us not
come with any patronizing nonsense aboutHis being a great human teacher.
He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."

The words of Jesus are not just the teachings ofa greatman - on par with
other greathuman teachers ofhistory - they are the words of God Himself.
When we read them, we are hearing God! Even more than that, when we get
to know Jesus, we are getting to know God, Himself. Anything short of seeing
Jesus as Godis what some callJesus lite. It is taking something true of Jesus
but not the whole truth. Hebrews gives us the whole loadof who Jesus is, and
Jesus lite is worthless in the light of the full story. He did far more than teach
greattruths, for He did something by His sacrifice thatis the greatesttruth.
He washedus white as snow by the shedding of His blood. We do not really
know who Jesus is, or for that matter, who God is, until we see what Jesus
accomplishedon the cross. The poethas captured this truth.
“Where is God?” inquired the mind: “To His presence I am blind. . . . I have
scannedeachstar and sun, Tracedthe certain course they run;
I have weighedthem in my scale, And cantell when eachwill fail; From the
caverns of the night I have brought new worlds to light;
I have measuredearth and sky Readeachzone with steady eye;But no sight
of God appears In the glory of the spheres.”
But the heart spoke wistfully, “Have you lookedat Calvary?” Thomas C.
Clark
Jesus satdown at the Father’s right hand because He finished the work of
atonement, which made it possible for John to write in I John 1:9, “If we
confess oursins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify
us from all unrighteousness.”No sin has to be paid for again, for Jesus paid
the price so all sin could be forgiven and cleansed. The
finished work of Christ does not mean that there is no more for Him to do.
The blood has to be applied, and so there is no end to the follow up of the
work done on the cross. If the blood was not applied to the doorpostwhen the
angelof the Lord passedover Egypt the firstborn would die. The blood had to
be applied then, and the blood of Jesus has to be applied today, and all
through history. We apply it by confessing oursin and seeking forgiveness
through our interceding Saviorwho will plead His blood before the throne of

God. Jesus everlives to intercede on our behalf, and so He is ever busy in a
world where sin is so common. The lost sinner can do nothing to save himself,
for Jesus has done it all, but he still must come to Jesus and ask for the
salvationhe purchasedand will freely give.
An Englishman by the name of Ebenezer Wootenhad just concluded a
preaching service in the village square. The crowdhad dispersed, and he was
busily engagedin loading the equipment. A young man approachedhim and
asked, “Mr. Wooten, whatmust I do to be saved?” Sensing that the fellow was
trusting his own righteousness, Wootenansweredin a rather unconcerned
way, “It’s too late!” The inquirer was startled. “Oh don’t saythat, sir!” But
the evangelistinsisted, “It’s too late!” Then, looking the young man in the eye,
he continued, “You want to know what you must DO to be saved. I tell you it’s
too late now or any other time. The work of salvationis done, completed,
finished! It was finished on the cross.” Thenhe explained that our part is
simply to acknowledge oursin and receive by faith the gift of forgiveness.
Jesus is the one he must go to and ask for this forgiveness. It is free, but it still
has to be askedfor, and this is the continuing work of Jesus as follow up of
His completedwork.
Jesus now administers the plan of salvation that he purchasedby His
sacrifice. It is like there is an insurance company for all His saints and sinner
who desire to become saints. All the premiums are paid up for life, but there is
still the need for applications to be submitted and for the transfer of merit to
coverthe cost. We make application for coveragewhenwe confess our sins to
Him, and then he intercedes and pleads His blood as sufficient payment for
them, and then Godwipes them from the record leaving it clean. Jesus is ever
busy in making what He did on the cross practicalin the lives of believers. By
His Spirit He empowers them to overcome sin and bring them through their
trials and tribulations. He is ever helping them to overcome all the enemies of
their faith. He dispatches angels to minister to them, and gives them the gifts
of the Spirit to enable them to serve the kingdom of God with power and
purpose.
Peter saidon the day of Pentecostin Acts 2:33, “Exalted to the right hand
of God, he has receivedfrom the Father the promised Hold Spirit and has

poured out what you now see and hear.” Peter saidagain in Acts 5:31, “God
exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might give
repentance and forgiveness ofsin to Israel.” Jesus administers the work of the
Holy Spirit and the vast work involved in forgiveness ofsin. What He did on
the cross was once forall, but the administration of His cleansing blood is a
never ending task. The heavenly work of Jesus will never be complete until
every possible sinner is cleansedby His sacrificialblood and made fit to dwell
with him in heaven. That is why the author of Hebrews can write in 10:19-22,
“Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the MostHoly Place
by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way openedfor us through the
curtain, that is, his body, and since we have a greatpriest over the house of
God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heartin full assurance offaith,
having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscienceandhaving
our goodies washedwith pure water.” Jesus paidit all, and He want to apply
His blood to cleanse allwho will come to Him and confess. The greatestfolly
in the world is to ignore and neglectwhat we have available in Jesus because
of the greatestsacrificein the universe.
What does 1 John 2:2 mean? [⇑ See verse text ⇑]
This verse opens with a statement many find difficult to understand: "He is
the propitiation for our sins." The Greek wordhilasmos can be translated as
"propitiation," "expiation," or "atonement." All of these refer to settling,
satisfying, or repaying a debt. In other words, Jesus is the one and only
sufficient payment for the sins of humanity. Without this payment, we are left
separatedfrom God. Notice that verse 1 describedJesus also as our
"advocate."This means that Christ not only speaks to God on our behalf, He
pays our debt for us, as well.
John was clearthat this powerof Jesus'sacrifice was made available to all
people of the world. These words resemble John 3:16: "ForGod so loved the

world…" This doesn't meant that every personwill actually be saved. It does,
however, mean that Christ's sacrifice was sufficientto pay the debt for anyone
who comes to faith in Him (Revelation22:17). There is a distinction between
Christ's powerto (potentially) save all people and those who actuallycome to
Him for salvation.
Understanding 1 John2:2
From the archives onthis blog (fromOctober2005) byRev. JohnSamson
Many ofyou know something of my struggle in coming to understand and
appreciate the doctrines ofgrace. One ofthe biggest hurdles I encounteredwas
my traditional understanding of 1 John 2:2. Fora long time, itactedmuch like
a roadblock in my thinking, preventing me from believing what I now consider
to be the clearand consistent teaching ofscripture.
How are we to understand the verse then?
Let me startby affirming that scripture is explicit in saying that Jesus died:
for God's people ("He wascutoffout of the land of the living, strickenforthe
transgressionofMy people" - Isaiah53:8; "He shallsave His people from their
sins" - Matt. 1:21);
for His sheep("Iamthe goodshepherd. The goodshepherdlays downHis life
for the sheep." - John10:11- note thatJesus categoricallystatesthatsome are
not His sheep- "but you do not believe because youare notMy sheep." - John
10:26)
for His friends ("Greaterlove has no one than this, that someone lays downhis
life for his friends. You are My friends if you do what I command you." - John
15:13-14;
for the Church ("...the churchof God, whichHe obtainedwith His own
blood." - Acts 20:28; "Husbands, love yourwives, as Christlovedthe church

and gave Himself up forher, that He might sanctifyher, having cleansedher..."
- Eph. 5:25, 26).
Indeed, as Godallows us to gaina glimpse into the future, Revelation5:9
reveals the song ofthe throngs of heavenas they sing to the Lamb upon His
throne, "And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthyare Youto take the scroll
and to openits seals, forYouwere slain, andby Your blood You ransomed
people for Godfrom everytribe and language andpeople and nation." Notice
that it does notsaythat He ransomedeverybody in everytribe, etc., butthat He
ransomedpeople for Godfrom every tribe, tongue, people andnation.
Yet at leastatfirst glance, 1 John2:2 seems to stronglydenythis idea that
Jesus'deathwas designedfora particularpeople. The verse states, "He is the
propitiation forour sins, and notfor ours only but also forthe sins of the whole
world."
I don't believe that scripture contradicts itself. Thatis in factwhy we are told
to study the word ofGod in order that we might rightly divide it (2 Tim. 2:15)
rather than simply throw up our hands saying a particular verse contradicts
others on the same subject. "AllScripture is God breathed" (2 Tim. 3:16) and
because there is one Divine Author of Scripture who does notcontradict
Himself, I am convincedthat hard work and careful study will eliminate
apparent contradictions.
I have written elsewhere aboutthe principles of correct interpretationof
scripture. In my article entitled "Playing Marbles withDiamonds" (here) I
referto a number ofprinciples of biblical interpretation (hermeneutics). We
startby affirming that there is only one correctinterpretation ofscripture.
Thoughthere may be many applications of a verse, itonly means whatit was
intended to mean whenit was written. Withthis as a foundation, two more
principles would apply here:
1. Authorship - who wrote the book? Whatwas his background, language,
culture, vocation, concerns, education, circumstance, whatstage oflife?

2. Considerthe Audience (whywas the book written? who was the audience?
whatwould these words have meant to its original recipients?)
I quote againDr. James White, whenhe wrote, “Rememberwhenyou were in
school andyou had to take a testona book youwere assignedto read? You
studied and invested time in learning the backgroundofthe author, the context
in whichhe lived and wrote, his purposes inwriting, his audience, andthe
specifics ofthe text. You did not simply come to class, popopenthe book, reada
few sentences, andsay, “Well, Ifeelthe author here means this.” Yet, forsome
odd reason, this attitude is prevalent in Christian circles. Whetherthatfeeling
results in aninterpretation that has anything at all to do with what the original
author intended to conveyis reallynot consideredanimportant aspect.
Everyone, seemingly, has the right to express their “feelings” aboutwhatthey
“think” the Bible is saying, as ifthose thoughts actuallyreflectwhat God
inspired in His Word. While we would never letanyone getawaywith treating
our writings like this, we seemto think Godis not bothered, andwhat is worse,
that our conclusions are somehowauthoritative in their representationofHis
Word.”
A third principle I mentioned in the article relates to the conceptofconsidering
the author’s context. This refers to looking atallof a person’s writings – John’s
writings, Paul’s writings, Luke’s writings, etc..
When we look elsewhere inJohn’s writings we see how he views the redemptive
work ofChrist. We readin Revelation(writtenbythe same John) thatby
means ofHis substitutionary death, Jesus actually“redeemedpeople forGod
out of everytribe, tongue, people andnation and made them a kingdomof
priests…” (Rev5:9, 10) Here Johntells us of no mere potential atonement for
everyone, buta specific atonement where Jesusactuallyredeemedcertain
people – notall without exception, but allwithout distinction.
We also notice in his Gospel anexactparallel in John’s use ofwords, which
give us a greatdealof insight as to whathe (John) wasreferring to.

In his Gospel, chapter11, verses51-52, Johnwrote these words, “he prophesied
that Jesus woulddie forthe nation, and not for the nation only, but also to
gatherinto one the children ofGodwho are scatteredabroad.”
In chartform, the parallel with 1 John 2:2 becomesclear:
Dr. Phil Johnson(who providedthis helpful chart) writes, "There is little
doubt that this is how John's initial audience would have understood this
expression. "Thewhole world" means "people ofallkinds, including Jews,
Gentiles, Greeks, Romans, andwhatnot" as opposedto "ours only" i.e., the
Jewishnation. Whatthe apostle Johnis saying in the John11 passageis
particularly significant: Christdied so thathe might gather"the children of
God" the elect, fromthe whole world."
Another very important insight is gainedwhen we see the many uses ofthe
word “world” found in John’s writing. There are atleastten different uses of
the wordfound in John’s Gospelalone.
In Hebrew culture, it is the father who choosesa bride for his son. Inthe same
way, the bride of Christ was chosenbythe Father, thengivento the Son, andall
in this number are without fail raisedup to eternallife (John6:37-39). The Son
loses none ofthose givento Him by the Father.
Finally, 1 John 2:2 tells us thatJesus is the propitiation for our sins as wellas
that of the whole world. IfJesus actuallydid propitiate (removedwrathby
means ofHis sacrifice) everybody’s sins onplanet earth, past, presentand
future, why would anyone everbe punished for their sins? Thatwouldmean
double jeopardy with Jesus punishedfor the sin and then the sinner also
bearing the punishment againin eternaljudgment in hell. Such a thought is
unthinkable.
Instead, Jesus providedanactual rather than a merely hypothetical universal
propitiation. He actuallyremoved the wrath ofGod forHis people throughout
the whole world. In contrast, the wrathofGod still remains (presenttense) on
the unbeliever. Johnmakes it clearthat, “Whoeverbelievesinthe Sonhas
eternallife; whoeverdoes notobeythe Sonshallnot see life, but the wrath of
Godremains onhim.” (John3:36)

All who are particularists (who believe thatnot everyone will be saved– that
some people will in factspend eternity in hell) believe in some type of limitation
to the atonement ofChrist. The Arminian limits its power, forit only becomes
effectual through man’s cooperation; the Reformedpersonlimits its extent.
Here’s a rather lengthy quote from C. H. Spurgeonon this theme:
“The doctrine of Redemptionis one ofthe most important doctrines ofthe
systemof faith. A mistake onthis point will inevitably leadto a mistake
through the entire systemof our belief.
Now, youare aware thatthere are different theories ofRedemption. All
Christians hold that Christdied to redeem, but all Christians do not teachthe
same redemption. We differ as to the nature of atonement, andas to the design
of redemption. Forinstance, the Arminian holds that Christ, whenhe died, did
not die with an intent to save any particular person; andthey teachthat
Christ’s death does notin itselfsecure, beyonddoubt, the salvationofany one
man living. Theybelieve that Christ died to make the salvationofall men
possible, orthatby the doing of something else, anymanwho pleases may
attain unto eternallife; consequently, theyare obligedto hold that if man’s will
would not give wayand voluntarily surrender to grace, thenChrist’s
atonementwould be unavailing. Theyhold that there was no particularity and
specialityin the death of Christ. Christdied, according to them, as much for
Judas in hell as for Peterwho mounted to heaven. Theybelieve that forthose
who are consignedto eternalfire, there was as true and reala redemption
made as forthose who now stand before the throne ofthe MostHigh.
Now, we believe no suchthing. We hold that Christ, whenhe died, had an
objectin view, and that objectwill mostassuredly, andbeyond a doubt, be
accomplished. We measure the designofChrist’s death by the effectofit. If any
one asks us, “WhatdidChrist designto do by his death?” we answerthat
question by asking him another — “Whathas Christdone, orwhatwill Christ
do by his death?” Forwe declare thatthe measure ofthe effectofChrist’s love,
is the measure ofthe designof it. We cannotso belie our reasonas to think that
the intention ofAlmighty Godcould be frustrated, orthat the designof so great
a thing as the atonement, canbyany waywhatever, be missedof. We hold—

we are not afraid to saywhat we believe — thatChrist came into this world
with the intention ofsaving “a multitude which no man cannumber;” and we
believe that as the resultof this, every personforwhom he died must, beyond
the shadow ofa doubt, be cleansedfromsin, and stand, washedinblood, before
the Father’s throne. We do not believe that Christ made any effectual
atonementfor those who are for everdamned, we dare not think that the blood
of Christwas evershedwith the intention of saving those whomGodforeknew
never couldbe saved, andsome ofwhomwere evenin hell whenChrist,
according to some men’s account, diedto save them.” C. H. Spurgeon–
ParticularRedemption, 2/28/1858: Spurgeon’s Sermons: Volume 4
Elsewhere he said, “The doctrine ofHoly Scripture is this, that inasmuch as
man could not keepGod’s law, having fallenin Adam, Christ came and
fulfilled the law on the behalf ofhis people; andthat inasmuch as man had
alreadybrokenthe divine law and incurred the penalty of the wrath of God,
Christ came and sufferedin the room, place, andsteadofhis electones, thatso
by his enduring the full vials ofwrath, they might be emptied out and not a
drop might everfall upon the heads ofhis blood-boughtpeople.” (Sermon310
– “ChristourSubstitute – New Park Street, Southwark)
“I had rather believe a limited atonement that is efficacious forallmen for
whom it was intended, than an universal atonementthat is not efficacious for
anybody, exceptthe will of man be joined with it.” (Sermonnumber 173 –
MetropolitanPulpit 4:121)
In anothersermon, Spurgeonsaid, “Once again, ifit were Christ’s intention to
save allmen, how deplorably has He been disappointed, forwe have His own
evidence that there is a lake that burneth with fire and brimstone, and into that
pit must be castsome ofthe very persons, who according to thattheory, were
bought with His blood. Thatseems to me a thousand times more frightful than
any of those horrors, whichare saidto be associatedwiththe Calvinistic and
Christian doctrine of particular redemption.” (C. H. Spurgeon– Sermon204 –
New Park StreetPulpit4:553)
I believe Spurgeon’s words are accurate. Ialso believe thatratherthan
undermining the case forChrist’s deathfor His electsheep, 1 John2:2actually

affirms it. When we understand the verse in its Johannine context(the writings
of the Apostle John) thenthe correctinterpretationbecomes veryclear.
Postedby JohnSamsononNovember9, 2007 10:14AM
Comments
All the verses youquote trying to define who Jesus diedfor define the positive,
but not the negative. Theyalldefine who He died for, but none ofthem define
who He did not die for.
Jesus saidHe, the goodshepherd, lays downHis life for the sheep. He never
saidHe did not lay down forthose who were not His sheep. Thatis something
theologians have addedthrough man's logic andreason. Theyhave put words
in the mouth of the Savior.
Let me use a foolishexample. Let's pretend I buy a watermelonforevery
personin the state ofOklahoma, where Ilive. Let's pretend that all my friends
live in Oklahoma.
One day I tell someone "Iboughtall these watermelons foreveryone in
Oklahoma!"
The next day, I tell someone "Iboughtall these watermelons forallmy
friends!"
Do these two statements contradict eachother? No!One statementis all
inclusive (like 1 John2:2). The otherstatementaddressesa specific sub-group
(my friends) withoutexplicitly excluding the largergroupas a whole.
This is how scripture treats the atoning work ofChrist. It never specifically,
explicitly excludes anyman, womanor child. Only man's theologyhas done
that.
I challenge you. Show me one verse in the Bible that explicitly says Jesus did
not die for a specific groupof people. Findit and e-mailit to me. When you
can'tfind it, repent and stopteaching this false doctrine oflimited atonement!

It is a dangerous thing to add to scripture, but that is exactlywhatyou have
done through man's logic andreason.
Postedby: Josh| July4, 2011 12:48 AM
Hi Josh,
Your accusations carrylittle weight. Youwishfor me to find a scripture that
says "Jesusdidnot die for the non elect" - orelse youbelieve I add to scripture.
Why would anyone wish to speak ofthe atonementin such language? Certainly
not the authors of scripture. Theydo speak positivelyconcerning whatthe
work ofChrist actuallyachievedand that He redeemedpeople OUT OF every
tribe, tongue, people andnation, not that He redeemedeveryone IN every tribe
tongue people and nation. The people He dies for are actuallysaved.. actually
redeemed, notmerely potentially so. Jesus providedanactualatonement that
atones, anactual propitiationthat removes wrathfor His people. The factthat
you do not find this convincing is no refutation whatsoever.
Postedby: JohnS | July 4, 201103:12AM
Hello my brothers, Itoo am on anamazing grace journey. Itseems thatGodis
continually peeling another layerof the law off ofmy soulso I canbetter see
Him through the lenses ofthe New Covenant. Ibelieve the underlying question
that arises inhearts when the whole electtopic is brought up is: does everyone
actuallyhave a choice to receive Jesus oris it something God"rigged" (Didhe
rig the "election")? Withoutgoing into too much verbage, one thing I have
noticedin Romans8 and1Peter1 is thatwe were "predestinedaccording to
foreknowledge..."This means thatalthoughGodforeknew us, He didn't "fore-
control" our decision. Furthermore, Jesus neversaid"Go into some ofthe the
world and preachthe gospel to some creatures". Mypointis, lets letGodbe
Godand focus on the missionHe gave us. Letus be like David and not concern
ourselves withmatters too greatfor us (Psalm131). Lets manifestChristfor all
the world to see andbe faithful to whatGod has calledus to do. We maynot be
able to control people's responsesbutwe will restassuredin the peace andjoy
that come from doing His will. Peace
Postedby: John| August 17, 2011 10:57PM

John,
Sure, Christians are predestinedaccording to the foreknowledgeofGod, but
whatexactly does thatmean? You assume itrefers to knowledge ofthe future
actions ofpeople, butnowhere in Scripture is this stated, andRomans 9 in fact
teaches clearlythatelectionis not according to works whatsoever. Formore on
this subjectsee:
http://www.reformationtheology.com/2005/11/foreknowledge_by_pastor_joh
n_s.php
Postedby: JohnS | August 18, 201112:23AM
"but nowhere in Scripture is this stated" - and, withequal force, "butnowhere
in Scripture is this stated" that"the whole word" means only"the elect". A
close reading ofRomans 9-11 shows thatthe non-elect(specificallyofIsrael)
have been hardened - but that one day they will be saved. Godhas bound all
men over to disobedience so thatHe may have mercy on the all. Why do we
insist onmaking things "clearer" thanGodhas? (FYI- Iam a former PCA
minister and a graduate from ReformedTheological Seminary- whichis notto
sayI am an expert - but I know, ina sense, where youare coming from....)
Postedby: Calvin Armenius | December7, 2011 08:38AM
Correction- In my postabove, Imeant "the whole WORLD" (not"word" -my
apologies!)
Calvin saidconcerning this issue (inhis commentary onJohn): "Andwhen he
says the sin of the world, he extends this favor indiscriminately to the whole
human race, thatthe Jews mightnot thing that he had beensent to them alone.
But hense we infer that the whole world is involved in the same condemnation
and that as all men with out exceptionare guilty ofunrighteousness before
God, theyneed to be reconciledto him. Johnthe Baptist, therefore, byspeaking
of the sinof the world, intended to express uponus the convictionof our own
misery and exhort us to seek the remedy."
Postedby: Calvin Armenius | December7, 2011 09:08AM

In 1 John 2:2, Johnmakesreferenceto two groups ofpeople: The firstgroupis
"us" or"ours", meaning himselfand the audience he is writing to (the
church). The secondgrouphe references is the "whole world"(everybodyelse).
He states thatChrist's propitiation is applied to BOTHgroups. How could
Johnhave statedit any more clearly? Whatverbiage/contextis the Calvinist
looking forother than whatScripture plainly states, to find a term that
describes "everysingle personwho everlived"? If"the world" doesn'tactually
mean "the world", thenare there otherseeminglyplain terms that Christians
have been misinterpreting this entire time? I see a slippery slope ofbad
exegesiswhentheologianstryto injecttoo much meaning into a simple term
that one Biblical author uses overandover again, andhas usedconsistentlyto
mean the same thing.
I am glad Mr. Samsonbrings up the factthat we needto look atthe entire body
of work regarding John's authorship. Becausewhenwe do that, we find that
when Johnreferences "the world", he isn'ttalking about a selectgroup,
pluckedfrom among everynation in the world. He actuallymeans the
WORLD. Mr. Samsonquotes a passagefromthe 11th chapterof John, but
conveniently omits other references to "the world" thatJohnmakes in his
gospel. He fails to reference John1:10; John1:29; John15:18,19; John16:8;
Sayings suchas "the worldhates you"; "the Spirit of truth which the world
cannotreceive."are nevermentionedby the author ofthis post. 1 John5:19:
"The whole worldlies under the powerofthe evil one."
If Jesus is the propitiation for the whole world, thenhe is the propitiation for
the whole worldwhich lies under the powerofthe evil one, whichhates Christ
and his followers, andwhichcannotreceive the Spirit of truth. Same author,
same context(1 John5:19).
How canthis be? Simple: Jesus, who "tasteddeathforevery man" (Hebrews
2:9)(explainthataway) "diedforall" (2 Corinthians 5:15), which, as itturns
out, actuallymeans ALL. See a pattern here? Repeatedly, we findthese all-
inclusive terms in Scripture as it relates to the atonement: "WHOLE world",
"all", and"every". Whatstandardterm of universality is the Calvinistusing as
a reference point to saythat these words don't mean whatthey say?

We canchoose to rejectthe sacrifice Christprovided. This is why not everyone
is saved. Godis so sovereignandpowerful that only he could have made beings
that have free will, and yet STILL accomplishhis perfectplan. Thatis true
sovereignty.
Postedby: CJ | January31, 2014 12:55 AM
Wow!Whata greatexplanationofGod's Word. Ithank Godfor giving us wise
men learnedin the scriptures, andI am evermore thankful when they
proclaim the Doctrines ofGrace insucha clearand concise way.
Postedby: StephenJennings | February3, 2014 11:15PM
I am curious if the thought evercrossedthatthe physical body ofthe non-elect
neededraisedtoo for eternaltorment. If the sin of adamcursedsoul and flesh
why wouldn't the physicalresurrectionofJesus also atone forthe physical
resurrectionofthe spiritually dead to join their souls atthe greatwhite throne
for eternal physicaljudgment Mt. 25 & Luke 16? No fleshcouldrise for
judgment whethersavedor not. It doesn'tnegate savedandunsaved. Mypoint
is that eventhe creationitselfgroans forthis in romans. Adam brought death
on it also.
Postedby: mark | April 22, 201412:34 PM
Re-insertthe Calvinists interpretationhere to John 3:16 andwatchthe
contradictionthey create within the same author.
See Spurgeons commentonthe raising ofall the deadphysically and Christs
atonementin his sermonFebruary17 1856. EveryCalvinistshould have to sit
under this sermon. Reallytiredof the hairsplitting to getto the same points.
Time to give up the intellectual selfstimulation and win more souls. (was
trained in the original language andthis nauseates me)
Postedby: Mark | April 22, 201412:48 PM

Mr. Samson, R C Sproulgothis stuff from Calvin. I amof Pauland Apollos all
overagain. And Moses, David, Calvin, Augustine, JosephSmithand
Mohammad couldnever be wrong.
Mark, There is no contradictionbetweenJohn3:16and1 John2:2 andI know
of no Reformedindividual who blindly follows JohnCalvin. As Spurgeon
testified:
"There is no soul living who holds more firmly to the doctrines ofgrace thanI
do, and if any man asks me whetherIam ashamedto be calleda Calvinist, I
answer- I wishto be callednothing but a Christian; but if you ask me, do I hold
the doctrinal views whichwere held by John Calvin, I reply, I do in the main
hold them, and rejoice to avow it." (C. H. Spurgeon, a DefenseofCalvinism)
Postedby: JohnS | April 22, 2014 01:43PM
Interesting discussionandarguments. Has the matter been consideredfrom
the perspective ofGod's justice? IfJesus diedforall inclusively, then all will
automaticallyreceive eternallife, becauseitis only a person's sinthat keeps
him from inheriting eternal life. If his sin is alreadypaid for, then there is not
evenany need for faith.
But not all have inherited eternallife. Those who have notare paying for their
ownsins. And if they are, thenChrist has not paid for them, forto take double
payment wouldbe a gross injustice. We mayneveraccuse Godofthat.
Postedby: Kevin | August 28, 201407:03AM
Interesting discussionandarguments. Has the matter been consideredfrom
the perspective ofGod's justice? IfJesus diedforall inclusively, then all will
automaticallyreceive eternallife, becauseitis only a person's sinthat keeps
him from inheriting eternal life. If his sin is alreadypaid for, then there is not
evenany need for faith.

But not all have inherited eternallife. Those who have notare paying for their
ownsins. And if they are, thenChrist has not paid for them, forto take double
payment wouldbe a gross injustice. We mayneveraccuse Godofthat.
Postedby: Kevin | August 28, 201407:04AM
Words give other words their meanings
The "World" as statedbefore has atmany different ways it is used. To sayit
means all persons fromAdam to whoeverthe lastborn will be,showsa person
who has not study the worduse of "world".
thank you brother for a greatposton 1John2
Postedby: Chris Stewart| February23, 201504:20PM
Psalm33:15tells us thatGodfashions all the hearts ofmen alike. This onits
ownclearlyshows thatGoddoes not make some menfor heavenand some men
for hell. You people that believe in the predestination/eternalsecurity
nonsense are undera delusion.
Postedby: Jim Miller| March25, 201610:06PM
Jim Miller,
Actually the delusion is to think Psalm33:15 whichsays "he who fashionsthe
hearts ofthem all and observes alltheirdeeds" negates anything in the wayof
Divine election. Itdoes nothing of the kind.
Postedby: JohnS | March25, 201610:25PM
brothers,Whetherthis is of contextabout your conversion, this is from the
LORD..(Isaiah55:6-11)
Postedby: Timothy | October9, 2016 08:11PM
Hello, I wouldlike to know if I cantranslate this article to portuguese andpost
it on my blog. Thank you! Glodbless you.
Postedby: Kellvyn Mendes | December4, 201606:49 AM

Greatarticle. Thank youforyour laborin Christ.
As an ex-arminianthis point has always beena struggle forme.
I cansee now that eitherthe Bible teaches thatallmen have indeed beenpaid
for according to these difficult verses -- whichmeans no one canbe punished
for theirs sins since Christhas actuallypaid for the sins ofthe whole world --
which is an overt contradiction... OR the word"WORLD" has gotto mean
different things at different times evenwhen the same personis using the same
word.
Postedby: Gerson| April 5, 2017 08:04 PM
Charles Spurgeonon1 Timothy 2:3-4
What then? Shallwe try to put anothermeaning into the text than that which it
fairly bears? Itrow not. You must, mostof you, be acquainted with the general
method in which our olderCalvinistic friends deal with this text. “All men,”
saythey,—”thatis, some men”: asifthe Holy Ghostcouldnot have said“some
men” if he had meant some men. “All men,” saythey; “thatis, some ofallsorts
of men”: as ifthe Lord couldnot have said“allsorts ofmen” if he had meant
that. The Holy Ghostby the apostle has written“allmen,” and unquestionably
he means allmen. I know how to getrid of the force ofthe “alls” according to
that criticalmethod which some time ago was verycurrent, but I do not see
how it canbe applied here with due regardto truth. I was reading justnow the
expositionof a very able doctorwho explains the text so as to explain it away;
he applies grammatical gunpowderto it, and explodes it by wayofexpounding
it. I thought whenI readhis expositionthat it wouldhave beena very capital
comment upon the text if it had read, “Who willnot have allmen to be saved,
nor come to a knowledge ofthe truth.” […] Mylove ofconsistencywithmy own
doctrinal views is not greatenoughto allow me knowingly to alter a single text
of Scripture. […] So runs the text, and so we must readit, “Godour Savior; who
will have all men to be saved, andto come unto the knowledge ofthe truth.”
Does notthe text mean that it is the wish ofGodthat men should be saved? The
word “wish” gives as muchforce to the original as it reallyrequires, and the
passageshouldrun thus—”whose wishitis that all men should be savedand

come to a knowledge ofthe truth.” As it is my wish that it should be so, as itis
your wish that it might be so, so itis God’s wishthat all men should be saved;
for, assuredly, he is notless benevolent than we are.
Postedby: Dale | January5, 2018 06:15PM
Greatdiscussion. Scripture clearlyteachespredestination(Romans 8:30),
electionandthat man will be without excuse(Romans 1:20). NaturalMandoes
not understand the things of God(1 Corinth2:14). Godgrants repentance
which leads to the knowledge oftruth (2 Timothy 2:25. Faithcomes from
hearing the word ofGod ( Romans 10:17). Godis the one Who is the author
and finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2). sowe seethatGodinitiates our life in
him. Only God knows whyman truly will be without excuse. His ways and
thoughts are not our ways andthoughts (Isaiah55 8-9).
Postedby: Milton Hester| August11, 201807:11PM
Are people still debating this? Calvinism is a doctrine ofmen. They believe
faith is a work, whichit is not. Godalone is responsible for my salvation, buthe
savedme because Ibelievedin him. My believing in him did notwarrant my
salvation, ie Icould believe in God all day long, andI still wouldn't be saved
until he CHOSE to save me. So me having faith does notmean I contributed to
my salvation. Faithis the requirement for salvation, andscripture is quite clear
on this. GodCHOOSES to save those who believe. He doesn'thave to, and
would be completelyjust if he chose notto. Butbecause ofhis grace, he does.
Look atthe story ofthe prodigal son. Whenthe waywardsonreturned to his
father, did his choice to return earnhim the right to be forgivenand received
back by his father? No. Didhis repentance somehow nullify him deserving
punishment? No. Didthe father punish him upon his return (whichhe
would've beentotally justified in doing)? No. Why? Becauseofhis father's
grace he hadmercy on his sonand he welcomedhim home and forgave all
trespasses, eventhoughthe sondid not deserve mercy, his fathergave it to him
because his fatherwas loving and merciful in nature. This actof grace and
mercy on the part ofGod gives him ultimate glorybecause itshows the
awesome love Godhas forhis creations.

If GodMADE me love him, that's not love, that's Godbasicallycreating
mindless robots to worshiphim. God gives allmen the choice to follow him or
not, and those who do, Godshows mercyto, andsaves. Those who CHOOSE to
rejecthim are without excuse, andithas nothing to do with them not being
part of some secretVIP ChristClub. They're without excuse becausethey
rejectedGod's hand reaching downto them.
Calvinism portrays God as deceitful, having a secret, hidden will only
discernable to a few people, thatcontradicts the general messagespokeninhis
word. I ask you, whatkindof godis this?
Godis sovereign, there's no reading betweenthe lines with him, he says what
he means and means whathe says, sotake Himat His wordwhen He says He
loved the WORLD so, thatHe sentHis only Sonto die so that WHOSOEVER
believes in Him shall have everlasting life.
http://www.reformationtheology.com/2007/11/understanding_1_john_22.php
PROPITIATION IN I JOHN 2:2
(A Doctrinal Study on the Extent of the Atonement)
Dr. Gary D. Long
_____________________
Introduction
In discussing the designor extent of the atonement, there are three key
doctrinal terms which are relatedto the priestly sacrifice ofChrist on earth,
that is, to the finished work of Christ. These terms are redemption,
propitiation and reconciliation. EvangelicalArminians and Calvinistic "four
point" universalists or modified Calvinists1 hold that there is a universal
design of the atonement which provides salvationfor all mankind without

exceptionor which places all of Adam's posterity in a savable state. They
contend that there is a twofold application of these three doctrinal terms — an
actualapplication for those who believe, a provisional application for those
who die in unbelief. The historic "five point" or consistentCalvinist2 asserts
that these terms have no substitutionary reference with respectto the non-
elect. In contrastto the former who hold to an indefinite atonement, the
consistentCalvinist, who holds to a definite atonement, sees no purpose,
benefit or comfort in a redemption that does not redeem, a propitiation that
does not propitiate or a reconciliationthat does not reconcile, which would be
the case ifthese terms were applicable to the non-elect.
For those who have wrestledwith the extent of the atonement, they are
acutely aware that there are three problem verses3 whichthe five point
Calvinist must scripturally answerif he is to consistentlysustain a biblical
position before the modified Calvinist that the saving design of the atonement
is intended by the triune God only for the elect. These versesare II Peter2:1,
which pertains to redemption; I John 2:2, which pertains to propitiation; and
II Corinthians 5:19, which pertains to reconciliation. If the particular
redemptionist canscripturally establish in any of these verses that God's
design of the atonement does not extend to the non-elect, then the theological
case forthe unlimited redemptionist crumples. In summary, if universal
propitiation in I John 2:2 cannot be biblically established, then what purpose
does a universal redemption in II Peter2:1 or a universal reconciliationin II
Corinthians 5:19 serve? Canit be true that Godthe Son redeemedthe non-
electfor whom God the Father's wrath will never be propitiated (satisfiedor
appeased)by virtue of Christ's death or that God the Father has been
reconciledby virtue of Christ's death to the non-electupon whom His
condemning wrath eternally abides (John 3:36)?
The purpose of this doctrinal appendix (the secondin a series by the author
on problem verses relating to the extent of the atonement) is to theologically
approachI John 2:2, which relates to propitiation — the secondof the three
major doctrinal terms. May those who have believed through grace find this
appendix of much help in their doctrinal study of the Word of God.

Propitiation in the New Testament
The term "propitiation" (hilasmos) means "satisfaction," "appeasement."
Theologically, propitiation means that God's wrath againstsin, demanded by
His justice, is appeasedon accountof the death of Christ for sinners.
There are four primary references in the New Testamentwhere the word
"propitiation" is used (cf. Rom. 3:25; Heb. 2:17; 1 John 2:2; 4:10). Three of
the four references clearlyteachthat propitiation is strictly limited to a
definite people, namely, the electof God.
Romans 3:25 states that God set forth Christ "a propitiation through faith
in his blood." From this reference it may be observedthat, if Christ is a
propitiation "through faith,"4 He cannot be a propitiation to those who never
have faith, and "all men have not faith" (II Thess. 3:2).
Hebrews 2:17 states that Christ was made a "merciful and faithful high
priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation(should be
translated propitiation) for the sins of the people." In context, "the people,"
are identified as the "children which God hath given" Christ, (v. 13), "the
seedof Abraham" (v. 16). Are not "the people" of verse 17 also to be
identified with the "many sons" in verse 10 and the "every man" in verse 9
for whom "by the grace of God he should taste death"?
I John 4:10 reveals the motivating cause of propitiation. "Herein is love,
not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and senthis Son to be the
propitiation for our sins."5 The propitiation is restrictedhere to the definite
pronouns, "we," "us," and"our"; that is, to believers, God's elect. Therefore,
it is concluded that at least three of the four major passages onpropitiation
are restrictedin design to God's elect.
I John 2:2
Concerning I John 2:2, Calvinistic universalists sayit teaches two aspects
of propitiation. One writes:

There is a propitiation which affects Godin His relation to the kosmos — with
no reference to the elect — and one which affects His relation to the elect. This
twofold propitiation is set forth in I John 2:2.6
The sum of the four point Calvinist position is that Christ is said, in some
sense, to be the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, meaning all
mankind without exception. This, according to another Calvinistic
universalist, is "the normal unbiased approachto this text."7
The meaning and nature of propitiation is not a matter of disagreement
betweenfour and five point Calvinists. The issue lies in the extent of
propitiation as taught in I John 2:2. Much has been written concerning both
sides of the issue. An examination of these writings reveals that the crux of the
difference hinges upon the term "whole world." The four point Calvinists say
the meaning is obvious. The words themselves, they say, without any wresting,
signify all men in the world, that is, world means world. John Owen, the
Puritan, writes, concerning the dogmatism with which the modified Calvinists
asserttheir "darling"8 proof for unlimited atonement, by saying:
The world, the whole world, all, all men! — who canoppose it? Call them [the
modified Calvinists] to the context in the severalplaces where the words are;
appeal to rules of interpretation; mind them of the circumstances and scope of
the place, the sense ofthe same words in other places;. . . [and] they. . . cry
out, the bare word, the letter is theirs: "Away with the gloss and
interpretation; give us [the modified Calvinists] leave to believe what the word
expresslysaith."9
Biblical Universal Terminology
That I John 2:2 contains universal language is evident from the term
"whole world." John 3:16 also uses the universal term "world" in the same
manner. It is clear, therefore, that there is a biblical or divine universalism
taught in Scripture. However, the issue does not centeron the fact that
universal terminology is used. It centers on the meaning or interpretation of
that terminology.

Four Interpretations of the Term "Whole World"
The major views which are universalistic in their interpretation of "whole
world" in I John 2:2 will be discussedunder the following four systematic
headings:"generical,""geographical,""eschatological,"and "ethnological."
The GenericalInterpretation
The genericalinterpretation of I John 2:2 is held by those who believe that
Christ's atonement was unlimited in design for the whole human race. Their
usual interpretation of the text is that Christ "is the propitiation for our sins
(meaning believers), and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole
world (including the non-elect)." This view interprets "whole world" to mean
all men genericallyor universally, that is, eachand every member of Adam's
race. Therefore, propitiation for the sins of the world does not save the world;
rather it only "secures the possibility of salvation."10Furthermore, this view
distinguishes betweenthe advocacyand propitiatory work of Christ in I John
2:1,2 and associatesactualsalvationonly with Christ's advocacy. This means
that Christ's propitiation on earth was and is universal for all men — both the
electand non-electalike. His advocacyin heaven, however, is restricted for
those only who believe in Him. The contingencyof one's salvation, therefore,
rests upon man and the so-called"conditionof faith."11 In other words, what
now brings unbelievers into condemnation is not their sins — God has been
satisfiedfor them by the blood of Christ — but the sin of rejecting Christ as
the divinely appointed mediator of salvation. But Warfield rightly objects to
this by saying:
Is not the rejection of Jesus as our propitiation a sin? And if it is a sin, is it not
like other sins, coveredby the death of Christ? If this great sin is excepted
from the expiatory [effectualcovering] of Christ's blood, why did not John tell
us so, instead of declaring without qualification that Jesus Christis the
propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but for the whole world? And
surely it would be very odd if the sin of rejection of the Redeemerwere the
only condemning sin, in a world the vast majority of the dwellers in which

have never heard of this Redeemer, and nevertheless perish. On what ground
do they perish, all their sins having been expiated?12
There are a number of observations that can be made in objectionto the
genericalor universal interpretation of I John 2:2. Some of the more
significant ones immediately follow, others will be mentioned in the discussion
under the geographical, eschatologicalandethnologicalsubheadings.
Terminologicalobjection. — The first observationmade in objectionto the
genericalview concerns the use of the term "world" (kosmos)in the New
Testament. Thatkosmos canand does have more than the meaning of all
mankind genericallycannot be denied (cf. John 1:10,11;3:17; 12:31; 17:6,9,1
l,18,21,23,24).13In fact kosmos, as effectuallydemonstratedin Owen's
work,14 has many uses and meanings — the usual meaning being "many of
mankind."
According to the New TestamentGreek text, kosmos occurs about185
times. It is used some 105 times by the apostle John, 47 times by Pauland 33
times by other writers. With the use of a concordance, it is readily observed
that kosmos is never used by Paul or the other writers to mean all mankind
genericallyin a salvationcontext unless John's usage is the exception. It is
used of all mankind universally in a context of sin and judgment (Rom. 3:6,
19; 5:12), but never in a salvationcontext.
In John's writings, kosmos is used a total of 78 times in his gospel, 23 times
in I John and 4 times in II John and Revelation. A check of eachof these
references, incontext, reveals that there are perhaps, at the most, eleven
occurrencesin ten verses which could possibly, even according to
Arminianism, mean all mankind genericallyin a salvationcontext. These
occurrencesare found in John 1:29; 3:16; two times in 3:17; once eachin
John 4:42; 6:33, 51;12:47; 16:8 and once eachin I John 2:2 and 4:14.
Concerning the possible usage ofkosmos to mean all mankind without
exceptionin the redemptive context of I John 2:2, let the reader observe that
kosmos is used differently at least21 out of 23 times elsewherein the epistle.
As a matter of fact, the identical term "whole world" is used in I John 5:19
where it cannot possibly mean all mankind absolutely. John writes: "we know

that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness(in the wicked
one)." Can this be true of the believerwho is in Christ? Let the readerjudge.
If the term "whole world" in I John 2:2 means all mankind generically, it is
an exceptionalusage in the epistle (objectively, only in I John 2:2 and 4:14
could it possibly refer to all mankind without exception — two times out of 23
occurrences). Therefore,it is the writer's contention that the burden of proof
rests upon those who interpret "whole world" genericallyto establishthat the
term means all mankind in any redemptive context, let alone I John 2:2. In
the writer's researchhe has not found any writer who holds to an indefinite
atonement attempting to do this; rather the term is always said to mean, in a
"normal and unbiased approach," the whole world, meaning all mankind,15
both the electand the non-elect.
Logicalobjection. — The secondobservationmade in objectionto the
genericalview is logical. It is basedupon the principle of the analogyof faith
and relates to the design of propitiation from the standpoint of the specialand
distinguishing love of God. The fact that Christ's blood was an appeasement
of God's wrath, in order that the chief purpose of God's love might be
manifested, demands Christ's death. But if God's giving His Son is a
manifesting of His specialdistinguishing love (and it is), and if "He spared not
his ownSon, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also
freely give us all things" (Rom. 8:32)? The answerto this question should be
obvious. The term "whole world" cannotrefer to all mankind genericallyin a
salvationcontext, for the non-electdo not receive all or any of the gifts of
saving grace which(according to Rom. 8:32) is assuredto them if, in reality,
Christ actuallydied for them. Do all men have faith (II Thess. 3:2)?16
Contextual objection. — A third observation made in objectionto the
genericalview lies in the factthat the context of I John 2:2 teaches that
Christ's advocacyand propitiation are the same in designand extent. This is
supported by the coordinating conjunction "and," which connects verse 2
with verse 1. Certainly no Calvinistic universalist is willing to admit that
Christ's advocacyactuallyextends to the non-elect. How, then, can
propitiation be absolutely universal if Christ's advocacyis not? In an attempt
to explain this objection, those who hold to the genericalinterpretation

intimate that it is Christ's advocacyin heavenwhich particularizes His
propitiation on earth and makes it efficacious before the Father. They say that
propitiation is conceivedas merely laying a basis for actualforgiveness ofsins,
and is spokenof therefore rather as "sufficient" than efficacious—becoming
efficacious only through the act of faith on the part of the believer, by which
he secures Christ as his Advocate.17
But this attempted explanation empties the conceptionof propitiation from its
biblical meaning and shifts the saving operation of Christ from His atoning
death on earth to His intercessionin heaven. However, as Warfield points out,
no support is given this elaborate constructionby John; and our present
passageis enough to shatter the foundation on which it is built. . . . The
"advocacy"ofour Lord is indeed basedhere on his propitiation. But it is
basedon it not as if it bore merely an accidentalrelationto it, . . . but as its
natural and indeed necessaryissue. Johnintroduces the declarationthat
Christ is—not"was," the propitiation is as continuous in its effectas the
advocacy—ourpropitiation, in order to support his reference of sinning
Christians to Christ as their Advocate with the Father, and to give them
confidence in the efficacyof his advocacy. The efficacyof the advocacyrests
on that of the propitiation, not the efficacyof the propitiation on that of the
advocacy. It was in the propitiatory death of Christ that John finds Christ's
saving work:the advocacyis only its continuation—its unceasing presentation
in heaven. The propitiation accordinglynot merely lays a foundation for a
saving operation, to follow or not follow as circumstances may determine. It
itself saves. And this saving work is common to Christians and "the whole
world." By it the sins of the one as of the other are expiated. . . . They no
longerexist for God and are not they blessedwhose iniquities are forgiven,
and whose sins are covered, to whom the Lord will not reckonsin?18
Grammaticalobjection. — The fourth observationmade in objectionto the
genericalview is grammatical. One contemporary Calvinistic universalist
attempts to explain Christ's suffering for the sins of both the electand non-
electby saying that His suffering was retroactive to Adam's fall and
potentially available (a better term would be hypothetically available) for the

non-electboth before and after the cross.19He explains I John 2:2 by saying
that Christ
is the propitiation for our sins," which means He is the actualpropitiation for
[believers' sins through faith]. . . . But we are also told that He is the
propitiation "for the sins of the whole world,". . [which] means that He is the
potential propitiation only [for the non-elect];otherwise the Apostle would
have been teaching universalism.20
Is this not an example of exegeticalhopscotchby a Calvinistic hypothetical
universalist? But what does I John 2:2 actually say? It says that Christ "is
(estin) the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins
of the whole world." The text does not saythat Christ is potentially the
propitiation for "our sins and "the sins of the whole world."21
Biblical objection. — The fifth and final observationmade in objection to the
genericalview concerns the use of the term "propitiation" in Romans 3:25,
Hebrews 2:17 and I John 4:10. In eachof these references, propitiation is
restrictedto believers, that is, to God's elect. Furthermore, when dealing with
a problem text, the principle of interpretation which requires one to
determine the usage of a word or term as it is used elsewheremust not be
ignored or slighted, especiallywhenit is used elsewhereby the same author.
Yet this is done by those who hold to generic universalism, for they do not
mention the extent of propitiation in its other occurrences whenthey discuss
the extent in I John 2:2. Both the modified and consistentCalvinists admit
that there is some ambiguity in the interpretation of I John 2:2; otherwise
there would not be the greattheologicalcontroversybetweenthem over the
meaning of this verse. Is it not proper, then, for I John 4:10 also to be
consideredto determine if it will help remove some of the ambiguity? Does I
John 4:10 help do this? "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he
loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins." Maythe reader
decide if this verse is helpful in understanding the extent of the atonement in
generaland the extent of propitiation in I John 2:2 in particular.
The GeographicalInterpretation

The secondexplanation of the universal terminology in I John 2:2 is that
termed under the heading of "geographicaluniversalism." This view
interprets "and he is the propitiation for our sins" as referring to the
recipients of John's epistle, that is, those believers living in Asia Minor. It
interprets the latter part of the verse "and not for ours only, but also for the
sins of the whole world" as referring to those Christians everywhere outside
Asia Minor who confess their sins to Christ their advocate. This view is close
to that of Augustine, Calvin and Beza
who understand by "the whole world" "the churches of the electdispersed
through the whole world"; and by the declarationthat Jesus Christ is "a
propitiation for the whole world," that in his blood all the sins of all believers
throughout the world are expiated.22
While the geographicalview has much scriptural merit and is certainly in
harmony with reality, it seems that the term "whole world" conveys
something beyond "the world of believers outside Asia Minor." In other
words, it seems to be more than just a geographicaldistinction. In the writer's
judgment this something else is explained by the following two interpretations.
The EschatologicalInterpretation
The third interpretation of the universal terminology in I John 2:2 is that
view termed "eschatologicaluniversalism," the future world that is saved at
the secondcoming of Christ, which will include all the electfrom all ages. This
is the view setforth by Warfield and has much to commend it. In John 1:29,
3:17 and 12:47, John declares that the mission of the Son in coming into the
world is not only to save individuals but to save the world itself. "Behold the
Lamb of God, which takethawaythe sin of the world." This, however, will
not come to pass until the eschatologicalfuture, at the end time, when God's
redemptive plan is complete. Then, and then only, will there be a saved world.
Concerning this view, Warfield writes:
It is the greatconceptionwhich John is reflecting in the phrase, "he is the
propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but for the whole world." This

must not be diluted into the notion that he came to offer salvation to the
world, or to do his part toward the salvationof the world, or to lay such a
basis for salvationthat it is the world's fault if it is not saved. John's thinking
does not run on such lines; and what he actually says is something very
different, namely that Jesus Christ is a propitiation for the whole world, that
he has expiated the whole world's sins. He came into the world because oflove
of the world, in order that he might save the world, and he actually saves the
world. Where the expositors have gone astrayis in not perceiving that this
salvationof the world was not conceivedby John — any more than the
salvationof the individual — as accomplishing itself all at once. Jesus came to
save the world, and the world will through him be saved; at the end of the day
he will have a savedworld to present to his father. John's mind is running
forward to the completion of his saving work;and he is speaking ofhis Lord
from the point of view of this completed work. From that point of view he is
the Saviorof the world. . . . He proclaims Jesus the Saviorof the world and
declares him a propitiation for the whole world. He is a universalist; he
teaches the salvation of the whole world. But he is not an "eachand every"
universalist: he is an "eschatological" universalist.23
In Warfield's exposition24 of the term "world" in I John 2:2, he discusses
his eschatologicaluniversalism view and what this writer has systematically
termed "generical" and"geographical" universalism. However, he does not
mention or discuss the fourth and following interpretation, namely, that
termed "ethnologicaluniversalism." Although, in this writer's judgment,
Warfield's eschatologicaluniversalismadequately explains John 1:29, 3:17
and 12:47 (there will be a future world in which all the sins of that world will
be taken away), it does not seem, as presented by Warfield, to fully account
for the contextual meaning of kosmos in John 3:16 or in I John 2:2.
The EthnologicalInterpretation
The ethnologicalinterpretation asserts thatthe term "world" in both I
John 2:2 and John 3:16, although including the geographicaland
eschatologicalviews, also stresses thatsome without distinction, not all

without exception, out of the Gentiles as wellas out of the Jews (Rom. 9:24)
have had their sins propitiated by the death of Christ. It is as though the Lord
were saying: "The Jews, Nicodemus, no longerhave a national monopoly on
the salvationof Jehovah. Do you not, Nicodemus, remember the words of the
prophet Isaiahwho said, 'I will also give the Holy One of Israelfor a light to
the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvationunto the end of the earth' (Isa.
49:6)? Nicodemus, did not the psalmist prophesy of me when he said,
'therefore will I give thanks unto thee, O Lord, among the heathen, and sing
praises unto thy name' (Ps. 18:49)?" Did not "the apostles and brethren that
were in Judea," when "they heard that the Gentiles had also receivedthe
word of God," declare:"then hath God also to the Gentiles granted
repentance unto life" (Acts 11:18)? Is not the term "world" used of the
Gentiles by the apostle Paul in Romans 11:11,12,15? Certainlyit is. Is it used
absolutely (meaning all Gentiles without exception) or is it used relatively
(meaning all Gentiles without distinction)? Relative, otherwise Christ's
teaching on hell would be erroneous. But if kosmos refers to Gentiles in a
relative sense in Romans 11 (and it does), is this how the apostle John uses it
in I John 2:2? The writer believes it is. But can it be establishedwhether John,
who was probably writing from Ephesus in Asia Minor, was writing first of all
to Jewishbelievers in his epistle while living in a Gentile environment? Arthur
Pink cites four convincing reasons thathe was. Theyare:
(1) In the opening verse he says of Christ, "Which we have seenwith our eyes.
. . and our hands have handled." How impossible it would have been for the
apostle Paul to have commencedany of his epistles to Gentile saints with such
language!(2) "Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old
commandment which ye had from the beginning" (I John 2:7). The
"beginning" here referred to is the beginning of the public manifestation of
Christ—in proof compare 1:1, 2:13, etc. Now these believers, the apostle tells
us, had the "old commandment" from the beginning. This was true of Jewish
believers, but it was not true of Gentile believers. (3) "I write unto you,
fathers, because ye have knownHim from the beginning" (2:13). Here, again,
it is evident that it is Jewishbelievers that are in view. (4) "Little children, it is
the lasttime: and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, evennow are
there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the lasttime. They went

out from us, but they were not of us" (2:18,19). These brethren to whom John
wrote had "heard" from Christ Himself that Antichrist should come (see
Matt. 24). The "many antichrists" whom John declares "wentout from us"
were all Jews, for during the first century none but a Jew posedas the
Messiah. Therefore,whenJohn says "He is the propitiation for our sins," he
can only mean for the sins of Jewishbelievers. (It is true that many things in
John's Epistle apply equally to believing Jews and believing Gentiles. Christ is
the Advocate of the one, as much as of the other.)25
Furthermore, when John added, "and not for ours only, but also for the sins
of the whole world," he signified that
Christ was the propitiation for the sins of the Gentile believers too, for, . . .
"the world" is a term contrastedfrom Israel. This interpretation is
unequivocally establishedby a careful comparisonof I John 2:2 with John
11:51,52, whichis a strictly parallel passage:"And this spake he not of
himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die
for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also He should gather
togetherin one the children of God that were scatteredabroad." Here
Caiaphas, under inspiration, made known for whom Jesus should "die."
Notice now the correspondencyofhis prophecy with this declaration of
John's: "He is the propitiation for our (believing Israelites)sins." "He
prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation." "And not for ours only."
"And not for that nation only." "But also for the whole world"—that is,
Gentile believers scatteredthroughout the earth. "He should gather together
in one the children of God that were scatteredabroad."26
Conclusion
The reader will have to judge for himself which of the four universalistic
interpretations of I John 2:2 is the most biblical. For this writer the
ethnologicalview best interprets the meaning of the immediate and general
context. It is the writer's position along with most historic Calvinists that in
the first part of I John 2:2

the believing Jews alone are intended, of whom John was one; and the
addition [last part of the verse]is not an extending of the propitiation of
Christ to others than believers, but only to other believers [i.e., Gentile
believers]. If it might be granted that in the first branch [first part of the
verse]all believers then living were comprehended, who might presently be
made partakers of this truth geographicalview], yet the increase oraccession
[last part of the verse]must be, by analogy, only those who were to be in after
ages [eschatologicalview]and remoter places than the name of Christ had
then reachedunto, — even all those who, according to the prayer of our
Savior, John xvii. 20, should believe on his name to the end of the world.27
It canbe readily seenfrom this interpretation that the geographicaland
eschatologicalviews are both included within the ethnologicalinterpretation.
The geographicalview is included by its very nature; that is, that God's elect
are scatteredamong the Jews and Gentiles throughout the whole world. And
it should be apparent that the ethnologicaland eschatologicalviews are closely
related as seenin John 3:16,17, where both are consecutivelysetforth. But
Warfield's eschatologicalview, by itself, tends to minimize the geographicalor
world-wide aspectof Christ's atonementand fails to mention the ethnological
view. Although all three views are in harmony with the scriptural doctrine of
election, it is this writer's conclusionthat the geographicaland eschatological
views do not, by themselves, fully answerthe intention of the apostle John in I
John 2:2. Rather it seems that John wants to make it clearto his readers in
this verse (as well as John 3:16) that the Old Testamentparticularism in
relation to the nation of Israel is now past, so he uses the universal term
"whole world," Christ has now brought in the New Covenantand has
prepared the way for New Testamentuniversalism—a divine universalism
which teaches that Messiahis the saviour of the spiritual seedof Abraham,
who testify in' due season28that they are none other than Christ's ransomed
ones, God's elect. It is for this very reasonthat the sovereigngrace
ambassadorofChrist knows that God will make "knownthe riches of his
glory on the vessels ofmercy" by calling them out "not of the Jews only, but
also of the Gentiles" (Rom. 9:23,24). Therefore, he carries out the great
commissionwith full assurance andmuch boldness, enduring "all things for

the elect's sake, thatthey may also obtain the salvationwhich is in Christ
Jesus with eternal glory" (II Tim. 2:10).
NOTES
For a description of EvangelicalArminians and Calvinistic "four point"
universalists or modified Calvinists, see Note No. 1 to the Introduction of
Appendix I, the first in a doctrinal series by the author on problem verses
relating to the extent of the atonement.
See Note No.2 to the Introduction of Appendix I.
Those who are theologicallyopposedto historic Calvinism should not hasten
to the conclusionthat the admission of problem verses by the five point
Calvinist diminishes his theologicalproof for definite atonement anymore
than the admissionof problem verses (and there are many) by the four point
Calvinist necessarilydiminishes his theologicalprooffor indefinite atonement.
The real issue centers upon what does the Scripture actuallyteach, a definite
or an indefinite atonement? Practicallyspeaking, it is evident that God, in the
wisdom of His providence, has not ordained that all true believers should
agree upon the extent of the atonement and other important but non-central
doctrines. Why He has so ordained is ultimately a mystery to every child of
God. We do learn, however, from I Corinthians 11:19 that doctrinal
differences in the church are ordained by God"that they which are approved
may be made manifest." We also know that, in the wisdom of God's
providence, the day of the Lord will come, but not before there is "a falling
awayfirst" and the revealing of the "man of sin" (II Thess. 2:3). In this sense,
erring on important but non-central doctrines, such as the designof the
atonement, can ultimately have serious consequences. As A. A. Hodge wrote
over one hundred years ago:"We do not objectto Calvinistic Universalism. . .
because ofany danger which — when consideredas a final position — it
threatens orthodoxy. We distrust it rather because it is not a final position,
but is the first step in the easydescentof error." Archibald Alexander Hodge,
The Atonement (reprint of 1867 ed.;Cherry Hill, N. J.: Mack Publishing Co.,
n.d.), p.238. A study of the history of doctrine verifies Hodge's statement(e.g.,

cf. Spurgeonand the "Down-Grade Controversy"of1887-92 inEngland or
the theologicalerosionfrom Puritanism to Liberalism within 150 years (1750-
1900)in New England). For these reasons the author is convinced that the
doctrine of the extent of the atonement is not to be viewed lightly. Historically,
a departure from definite atonement has been inseparably linked with a
departure from orthodox teaching on the doctrines of originalsin and
substitutionary atonement. This, in-turn, has seriouslyaffectedbiblical
evangelismand weakenedthe Christian's trust and assurance in the one who
declares:"I am the first, and the last;and beside me there is no God" (Isa.
44:6), "beside me there is no saviour" (Isa. 43:11). The author is not so naive,
however, as to believe that this series of doctrinal appendixes will persuade
any convincedEvangelicalArminian or modified Calvinist that Christ's
substitutionary atonement was particular in design for saving the electonly
with no saving provision for the non-elect. Such a change in theological
conviction only comes from the Holy Spirit and, for reasons ultimately known
only to God, He does not in these last days appear to be changing the
convictions of large numbers of traditional evangelicalChristians whose
existential minds are apparently closed, not being in submission to the
teaching of the whole counselof God, especiallywith reference to His
sovereigntyand the particularistic design of the atonement. The author does
believe, however, that these doctrinal appendixes may help many of those who
have believed through grace and are open to learning more about the
doctrines of grace.
The words "through faith" are grammaticallymore naturally connectedwith
"propitiation" rather than with "being justified," "setforth" or "through his
blood." Hence, it is Christ Jesus whom God has set forth as a propitiation to
be receivedby faith through his blood.
Observe also that the love manifested in I John 4:10 is the speciallove of God,
which is the highest form of His love expressedtowardman. It is this special
redemptive love, the giving of Christ as a sacrifice, which is the motivating
cause ofgiving all the other gifts of saving grace, the "all things" of Romans
8:32. The immediate context in Romans 8 teaches, among otherthings, that
predestination, calling, justification and glorificationare included in the "all
things" of verse 32, that is, for all the Christians at Rome and, by extension,

for all true believers. Now, if this be true (and it is according to context), is not
saving faith also included in the "all things"? Is one justified by any other
means than faith? No, not according to Scripture. Therefore, if justification is
included as one of the gifts of saving grace in the "allthings," then saving
faith must also be included. Clearly, this passage inRomans 8 limits the extent
of Christ's substitutionary death to God's elect.
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology(eight vols.;Dallas, Texas:Dallas
Seminary Press, 1948), III, 95-96.
Robert P. Lightner, The Death Christ Died—A Case for Unlimited Atonement
(Des Plaines, Illinois: RegularBaptist Press, 1967), p.81.
John Owen, The Deathof Deathin the Deathof Christ (reprinted from Vol. X
of Owen's Works, published in 1852 by Johnstone and Hunter, Edinburgh,
and ed. by William H. Goold; London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1959), p.
191.
Ibid.
Chafer, Systematic Theology, V, 197.
Historic Calvinists use the theologicalterm"condition of faith" in a different
sense than that of Calvinistic universalists;that is, Christ did not die for any
upon condition, if they do believe, but He died for all God's electthat they will
believe and believing have eternallife. Becausesaving faith itself is among the
principal effects and fruits of the death of Christ (see Note 5 above), salvation
is bestowedconditionally only as viewed by the lostsinner. Forhim to
experience salvation, he must believe; but saving faith, which is the condition
for man, is also absolutely procured by Christ. Otherwise, if faith is not
procured for believers, then their salvationis not all of grace. When the
believer grows in grace and sees thatthe condition of faith has been procured
by Christ, then should he not cry out to God, "O Lord, why me?"
John E. Meeter(ed), SelectedShorterWritings of Benjamin B. Warfield (two
vols.; Nutley, New Jersey:Presbyterianand ReformedPublishing Company,
1970-73), I, 172.

Those who hold to universal propitiation in a generical sense are exhortedto
refer to Owen's work (pp.189-95;204-26)where he deals exhaustively with the
terms "world," "whole world" and their equivalents. His arguments for
definite atonement in response to the genericalinterpretation of such passages
as John 3:16 and I John 2:2 are irrefutably statedand, in the opinion of this
writer, can never be biblically disavowedbecause Owen'sarguments are
biblical.
Ibid., pp.191-93. The readeris also referred to Hendriksen's work for a study
of John's use of the term "world." Cf. William Hendriksen, A., Commentary
on the Gospelof John (two vols. in one; London: The Banner of Truth Trust,
1954), I, 79.
Lightner, The DeathChrist Died, p.81.
See Note 5, above.
Meeter(ed.), SelectedShorterWritings, I, 173.
Ibid., pp. 173-74.
Norman F. Douty, The DeathChrist Died, (Swengel, Pennsylvania:Reiner
Publications, 1972), p.29.
Ibid., pp.32-33.
The verb "is', (estin) is in the presenttense and indicative mood (the mood of
certainty or reality) and governs both clauses in the verse. If Christ is the
potential propitiation for the non-elect, why was not the subjunctive mood
used (the mood of mild contingencyor potentiality which often assumes
unreality depending, of course, onthe context)? Why does not contextual
exegesissupport the translation that Christ is the potential propitiation of our
sins and the sins of the whole world? Douty simply does not address this
grammaticalproblem and provides absolutely no exegeticalsupport for
asserting that Christ is the potential propitiation for those who die in unbelief.
Meeter(ed.), SelectedShorterWritings, 1, 170.
Ibid., pp.176-77.

Ibid., pp.169-77.
Arthur W. Pink, The Atonement (Venice, Florida: ChapelLibrary, n.d.),
pp.13-i4.
Ibid., p.14.
Owen, The Deathof Death in the Deathof Christ, p.226.
"The 'due season'comprises the entire new dispensation. . . . Not during the
old dispensationbut only during the new canthe mystery be fully revealed
that all men, Gentiles as well as Jews, are now on an equal footing; that is,
that the Gentiles have become fellow-heirs and fellow-members of the body
and fellow-partakers ofthe promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel'(Eph.
3:6; cf. Eph. 2:11,12)." Cf. William Hendriksen, New Testament
Commentary: Expositionof the PastoralEpistles (Grand Rapids: BakerBook
House, 1957), p.99.
This article is "Appendix II", takenfrom Dr. Gary Long's Definite
Atonement, Philadelphia: Presbyterianand Reformed Publishing, 1977. pp
85-101.
1 John 2:2
Arthur W. Pink
THERE is one passagemore than any other which is I appealed to by those
who believe in universal redemption, and which at first sight appears to teach
that Christ died for the whole human race. We have therefore decided to give
it a detailed examination and exposition.

"And He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the
sins of the whole world" (1 John 2:2). This is the passagewhich, apparently,
most favors the Arminian view of the Atonement, yet if it be considered
attentively it will be seenthat it does so only in appearance, andnot in reality.
Below we offer a number of conclusive proofs to show that this verse does not
teachthat Christ has propitiated God on behalf of all the sins of all men.
In the first place, the fact that this verse opens with "and" necessarilylinks it
with what has gone before. We, therefore, give a literal word for word
translation of I John 2 :1 from Bagster's Interlinear: "Little children my,
these things I write to you, that ye may not sin; and if any one should sin, a
Paraclete we have with the Father, Jesus Christ(the) righteous". It will thus
be seenthat the apostle Johnis here writing to and about the saints of God.
His immediate purpose was two-fold: first, to communicate a messagethat
would keepGod's children from sinning; second, to supply comfort and
assurance to those who might sin, and, in consequence,be castdown and
fearful that the issue would prove fatal. He, therefore, makes knownto them
the provision which God has made for just such an emergency. This we find at
the end of verse 1 and throughout verse 2. The ground of comfort is twofold:
let the downcastand repentant believer(1 John 1:9) be assuredthat, first, he
has an "Advocate with the Father";second, that this Advocate is "the
propitiation for our sins" Now believers only may take comfort from this, for
they alone have an "Advocate", forthem alone is Christ the propitiation, as is
proven by linking the Propitiation ("and")with "the Advocate"!
In the secondplace, if other passagesin the New Testamentwhich speak of
"propitiation," he comparedwith 1 John 2:2, it will be found that it is strictly
limited in its scope. Forexample, in Romans 3 :25 we read that God setforth
Christ "a propitiation through faith in His blood". If Christ is a propitiation
"through faith", then He is not a "propitiation" to those who have no faith!
Again, in Hebrews 2:17 we read, "To make propitiation for the sins of the
people." (Heb. 2:17, R. V.)
In the third place, who are meant when John says, "He is the propitiation for
our sins"? We answer, Jewishbelievers. And a part of the proof on which we
base this assertionwe now submit to the carefulattention of the reader.

In Galatians 2:9 we are told that John, togetherwith James and Cephas, were
apostles "unto the circumcision" (i.e. Israel). In keeping with this, the Epistle
of James is addressedto "the twelve tribes, which are scatteredabroad" (1:1).
So, the first Epistle of Peter is addressedto "the electwho are sojourners of
the Dispersion" (1 Pet. 1:1, R. V.). And John also is writing to savedIsraelites,
but for savedJews and saved Gentiles.
Some of the evidences that John is writing to saved Jews are as follows. (a) In
the opening verse he says of Christ, "Which we have seenwith our eyes . . . .
and our hands have handled". How impossible it would have been for the
Apostle Paul to have commencedany of his epistles to Gentile saints with such
language!
(b) "Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old
commandment which ye had from the beginning" (1 John 2:7). The
"beginning" here referred to is the beginning of the public manifestation of
Christ-in proof compare 1:1 ; 2:13, etc. Now these believers the apostle tells
us, had the "old commandment" from the beginning. This was true of Jewish
believers, but it was not true of Gentile believers.
(c) "I write unto you, fathers, because ye have knownHim from the
beginning" (2:13). Here, again, it is evident that it is Jewishbelievers that are
in view.
(d) "Little children, it is the lasttime: and as ye have heard that Antichrist
shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is
the lasttime. They went out from us, but they were not of us" (2:18, 19).
These brethren to whom John wrote had "heard" from Christ Himself that
Antichrist should come (see Matthew 24). The "many antichrists" whom John
declares "wentout from us" were all Jews, forduring the first century none
but a Jew posedas the Messiah. Therefore, whenJohn says "He is the
propitiation for our sins" he can only mean for the sins of Jewishbelievers.*
In the fourth place, when John added, "And not for ours only, but also for the
whole world", he signified that Christ was the propitiation for the sins of
Gentile believers too, for, as previously shown, "the world" is a term

contrastedfrom Israel. This interpretation is unequivocally establishedby a
careful comparisonof 1 John 2:2 with John 11:51, 52, which is a strictly
parallel passage:"And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that
year, he prophesied that Jesus shoulddie for that nation; And not for that
nation only, but that also He should gathertogetherin one the children of God
that were scatteredabroad". Here Caiaphas, under inspiration, made known
for whom Jesus should "die". Notice now the correspondencyofhis prophecy
with this declarationof John's:
"He is the propitiation for our (believing Israelites)sins."
"He prophesied that Jesus shoulddie for that nation."
"And not for ours only." "And not for that nation only."
"But also for the whole world"-That is, Gentile believers scatteredthroughout
the earth.
"He should gather togetherin one the children of God that were scattered
abroad."
In the fifth place, the above interpretation is confirmed by the fact that no
other is consistentor intelligible. If the "whole world" signifies the whole
human race, then the first clause and the "also" in the secondclause are
absolutely meaningless. If Christ is the propitiation for every-body, it would
be idle tautologyto say, first, "He is the propitiation for our sins and also for
everybody". There could be no "also" if He is the propitiation for the entire
human family. Had the apostle meant to affirm that Christ is a universal
propitiation he had omitted the first clause ofverse 2, and simply said, "He is
the propitiation for the sins of the whole world." Confirmatory of "not for
ours (Jewishbelievers)only, but also for the whole world"-Gentile believers,
too; compare John 10:16; 17:20.
In the sixth place, our definition of "the whole world" is in perfectaccord
with other passages in the New Testament. Forexample: "Whereofye heard
before in the word of the truth of the Gospel;which is come unto you, as it is
in all the world" (Col. 1:5,6). Does "allthe world" here mean, absolutelyand
unqualifiedly, all mankind? Had all the human family heard the Gospel? No;

the apostle's obvious meaning is that, the Gospel, insteadof being confined to
the land of Judea, had gone abroad, without restraint, into Gentile lands. So
in Romans 1:8: "First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that
your faith is spokenof throughout the whole world". The apostle is here
referring to the faith of these Roman saints being spokenof in a way of
commendation. But certainly all mankind did not so speak oftheir faith! It
was the whole world of believers that he was referring to! In Revelation12:9
we read of Satan"which deceiveththe whole world". But again this
expressioncannotbe understood as a universal one, for Matthew 24 :24 tells
us that Satandoes not and cannot"deceive" God's elect. Here it is "the whole
world" of unbelievers.
In the seventh place, to insist that "the whole world" in 1 John 2:2 signifies
the entire human race is to undermine the very foundations of our faith. If
Christ is the propitiation for those that are lost equally as much as for those
that are saved, then what assurance have we that believers too may not be
lost? If Christ is the propitiation for those now in hell, what guarantee have I
that I may not end in hell? The blood-shedding of the incarnate Son of God is
the only thing which can keepany one out of hell, and if many for whom that
precious blood made propitiation are now in the awful place of the damned,
then may not that blood prove inefficacious for me! Away with such a God-
dishonoring thought.
Howevermen may quibble and wrestthe Scriptures, one thing is certain: The
Atonement is no failure. God will not allow that precious and costlysacrifice
to fail in accomplishing, completely, that which it was designedto effect. Not a
drop of that holy blood was shed in vain. In the last greatDaythere shall
stand forth no disappointed and defeatedSaviour, but One who "shall see of
the travail of His soul and be satisfied" (Isa. 53:11). These are not our words,
but the infallible assertionof Him who declares, "Mycounselshallstand, and
I will do all My pleasure" (Isa. 64:10). Upon this impregnable rock we take
our stand. Let others reston the sands of human speculationand twentieth-
century theorizing if they wish. That is their business. But to God they will yet
have to render an account. For our part we had rather be railed at as a
narrow-minded, out-of-date, hyper-Calvinist, than be found repudiating
God's truth by reducing the Divinely-efficacious atonementto a mere fiction.

* It is true that many things in John's Epistle apply equally to believing Jews
and believing Gentiles. Christ is the Advocate of the one, as much as of the
other. The same may be said of many things in the Epistle of James whichis
also a catholic, or generalepistle, though expressly addressedto the twelve
tribes scatteredabroad.
1 John 2:2 and Limited Atonement
“He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins
of the whole world.” (1 John 2:2)
The preceding passage is oftencited as a case againstLimited Atonement, and
has causedmuch confusionfor the Calvinist. What does this passagemean?
The heart of John’s Epistles concerns the Judaistheresy. Over and over
again, he warns that “No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever
confesses the Son has the Fatheralso.” (1 John 2:23). It also appears as if he
was writing to JewishChristians in particular, those who had been “anointed
by the Holy One” (1 John 2:20) and knew the truth (1 John 2:21). John was
writing to those who had the “old commandment … from the beginning” (1
John 2:7), most likely referring to Jewishconverts (the Gentiles did not have
the old commandment from the beginning).
So when John tells us that Christ “is the propitiation for our sins, and not for
ours only”, he is using the pronoun “ours” to refer to JewishChristians.
Those who push this passageto favor unlimited atonement must assume that

“ours” and “the whole world” consists ofa dividing line betweenChristians
and non-Christians, and that is a huge assumption. John Gill comments:
“1Jn2:2 - And he is the propitiation for our sins,.... Forthe sins of us who now
believe, and are Jews:
and not for ours only; but for the sins of Old Testamentsaints, and of those
who shall hereafterbelieve in Christ, and of the Gentiles also, signifiedin the
next clause:
but also for the sins of the whole world; the Syriac version renders it, "not for
us only, but also for the whole world"; that is, not for the Jews only, for John
was a Jew, and so were those he wrote unto, but for the Gentiles also. Nothing
is more common in Jewishwritings than to callthe Gentiles ‫,ַמחע‬ "the
world"; and ‫כ‬ eht fo snoitaneht" ,‫סעתחכ‬ ‫ַתמתח‬ dna ;"dlrow elohw eht" ,‫סעתחכ‬ ‫ח‬
world"”.
We have, on many occasions,examinedthe phrase “the world” in it’s limited
sense. Forexample, if “the world” in 2 Corinthians 5:19 were meant to refer
to every single individual on planet earth, we are stuck with universal
salvation.
John, in his gospel, was a little clearerin his belief concerning the atonement.
“He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he
prophesied that Jesus woulddie for the nation, and not for the nation only,
but also to gatherinto one the children of Godwho are scatteredabroad.”
(John 11:51-52)

It is quite clearthat John did not hold that Christ died for every single
individual, but for “ours” (the nation – Israel), and not only for “ours” (this
nation only), but for the “whole world”, (the children of God who are
scatteredabroad.)1 John 2:2, when taken in context, is no threat to the
Biblical doctrine of Particular Redemption, but instead is a powerful passage
supporting Unconditional Election. Christ's death on the cross has secured
eternal redemption (Hebrews 9:12), and His work saves all that He intended
to save.
Postedby Puritan Lad at 4:35 PM
https://covenant-theology.blogspot.com/2008/01/1-john-22-and-limited-
atonement.html
A QuestionI Was Asked:
'How Do "Limited Atonement People" View 1 John 2:2?'
The Question:
'I am much strengthenedin my scriptural understanding by things you have
written and I have been forcedto re-evaluate some old understandings. I
especiallyagree that4 point Calvinism is a biblically-healthy position but that
"limited atonement" is not what the Bible teaches atall, therefore 5-point

Calvinism is erroneous. 1 John 2:2 has greatly strengthenedme here. But how
do "limited atonement people" view 1 John 2:2?'
My Reply:
Okay, first of all for any who are re-evaluating the teaching of 'limited
atonement,' I strongly recommend Norman F. Douty's 'Did Christ Die Only
for the Elect?'(which was originally called'The Deathof Christ'). Amazon
should be able to obtain copies for any who are interested. It is, by the way, a
book of only 180 pages and is inexpensive but well worth reading. Over the
years on so many occasions Ihave found that comparativelysmall and
inexpensive books often seemto contain some greatspiritual jewels.
Now, with regardto 1 John 2:1-2:
'1. My little children, these things I write to you, that you may not sin. And if
anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous.
2. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but
also for the whole world.' (NKJV).
Limited Atonement Exclusivists have a real problem with any conceptthat the
work of Christ has any efficacyor application beyond a very small 'called and
chosen'group and they have tried to find all sorts of ways to twist John's clear
words, but they have frankly lostall the arguments on linguistic, logicaland,
of course, just plain Scriptural grounds. Owenand Pink especiallyangrily
tried to turn this Scripture around. Owenclaimed that 'the propitiation for
our sins' was a reference to the sins of JewishChristians, and 'the whole
world' simply referred to Gentile Christians. Undoubtedly following Owen,
Arthur Pink taught exactly the same thing. But most modern Bible scholars

considerthat First John was originally sent to the churches of westernAsia
and Asia Minor, indeed the same sort of congregationsas the 'letters to the
churches'of Revelation2 and 3 (the same writer, of course). These were
strongly Gentile congregations withfew, if any, Jews within the congregations.
Since John would have been well-aware ofhis audience in those
congregations, itseems unlikely that his "little children" and "we" referredto
Jewishbelievers - it is far and awaymore likely that the "little children" and
"we" and "our" are a simple and obvious reference to fellow believers - fellow
Christians (Gentile or Jewish)!The Owen/Pink argument here is very weak.
Secondly, the expression"world" always refers to the unbelieving world in
John's writings as Arthur Pink must have well known, and yet - just in this
particular case -he insisted that 'the whole world' was a reference to Gentile
believers. Again, weak. Moreover, in 1 John 5:19, the expression'the whole
world' occurs againwhen John writes, "...the whole world lies under the sway
of the wickedone." Here John clearly shows how he choosesto use that
particular expression- it is not a reference to Gentile believers but to the
ungodly world. Just about every Greek lexicon one may find shows the 'whole
world' of 1 John 2:2 to be a reference to mankind in general(see the Kittel,
Robinsonand Arndt-Gingrich for example).
As well as Owenand Pink, John Murray and B.B. Warfield made great
attempts to twist the clearmeaning of 1 John 2:2 because they had accepteda
theologicalbrand which taught that it is preposterous that Jesus could be the
"propitiation" for the sins of the entire world. But the Bible is clear that God
cuts nobody off and the personal decisionand choice of men and womenas to
whether they will follow Jesus is absolutely meaningful. God has never made a
decisionto cut off around 90% of humanity from any hope of receiving His
grace:this would be the 'Fatalism'of paganism, and would surely be a victory
for Satan, moreover, not a single Scripture teaches sucha monstrous thing.
The Bible is actually careful to avoid the conclusionthat some are
'reprobates,'doomed to destruction. We may note Matthew 25:34, for
example. Here, the King, in addressing those on His right hand, says,

"...Come, youwho are blessedby my Father; take your inheritance, the
kingdom prepared for you since the creationof the world." But contrastthis
with His address to those on his left hand in verse 41: "...Departfrom me, you
who are cursed [He does not say 'of my Father'] into the eternal fire, prepared
[not for you, but] for the devil and his angels." Predestinationis about the
saved, not about the lost - please note the King's positivity that the kingdom is
speciallyprepared for His people, but His refusal to make a 'logicalleap' that
damnation is equally 'prepared' for the rebellious! According to biblical
teaching, those finally lost will bring this upon themselves, with hell only being
'prepared' for the devil and his demons.
"ForGod so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever
believes in him shall not perish but have eternallife. ForGod did not send his
Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."
(John 3:16-17, NIV).
An Objectionto the Above View (which I receivedin 2014):
"Justread what you wrote on 1 John 2:2. Interesting, but is it not possible
that John intended to mean that the "...but also for the whole world" (end of
verse 2) simply referred to all future Christians? So, his "we" and "ours"
referred to believers of his own day and "the whole world" was a reference to
Christians of the future? How about it? Maybe this was a little logically
carelessby John, but is it not possible?"
MY RESPONSE:
Okaythis might be a valid point and it is strongerthan the arguments used by
Pink and the hard-line Calvinists but there remain problems with this. If we
acceptthat the Holy Spirit inspired the Bible would such sloppy logic have
ever gotthrough? That is, that John did not really mean "the whole world"
(as he wrote), but simply Christians of the future. If we compare that to what
John 3:16-17 plainly says, it falls short. John clearly wrote therein that "...For
God did not send His soninto the world to condemn the world, but to save the

world through him." We must remember that both come from the same
writer and Apostle!
Robin A. Brace, 2007.Slightupdated: 2018.
http://www.ukapologetics.net/07/1john22.htm
Many martyrs have given their lives for something they believe in. But one
sacrifice surpassesthem all—that of our Creator. What was it for?
By Jim Franks
“Jesus diedfor your sins!” You’ve heard that statement before, but have you
fully consideredwhat really happened that day almost 2,000 years ago ona
lonely hillside outside Jerusalemand what it means for you and me?
In Romans 5:7-8 Paul wrote, “Forscarcelyfor a righteous man will one die;
yet perhaps for a goodman someone would even dare to die.”
Yes, sometimes we see someone die for a person or a cause he or she believes
in. One heartrending example of this occurredJune 20, 2009, as a 26-year-old
Iranian woman named Neda was hit in the chest by a single bullet during a
demonstration in the streets ofTehran. It was all caught on video and
broadcastaround the world.
Within hours, millions witnessedher lastmoments of life. You could see the
fear in her eyes;“Whatis happening to me?” they seemedto say. Within a
few minutes she was dead in a pool of blood. While Neda did not go into the
streets that day expecting to die, she was proclaimeda martyr for Iranian
freedom.
Christians are no strangers to sacrifice

One of the most famous books in Christian literature is Foxe’s Book of
Martyrs, written by John Foxe (or Fox)in the 16th century to record the
history of Christian martyrs after the founding of the Church. He begins with
the accountin Acts 7 of Stephen, falselyaccusedofblasphemy. After
delivering a powerful defense that condemned his accusers, Stephensuffered
the horrible death of stoning, becoming the first martyr standing up for the
name of Christ.
Only one individual was perfect, sinless and completely innocent, and yet
willingly gave His life for the greatestcause ofall.
Foxe then records the traditions that James, the son of Zebedee and disciple of
Jesus Christ, was beheaded. Philip was beaten, thrown into prison and then
crucified. James, the brother of Jesus, “atthe age of ninety-four was beaten
and stonedby the Jews;and finally had his brains dashedout with a fuller’s
club.” Peterwas crucified, and Paul was beheaded. As far as we know, John
was the only one of the original 12 apostles who did not suffer a martyr’s
death.
A sinless sacrifice
Throughout history, we have seenthose who have made noteworthy, even
heroic, sacrifices in laying down their lives. But even the men and women who
died for the name of Christ, though they were righteous, can’t be counted as
the greatestsacrifice. Thatdistinction was earnedby Someone else.
Going back to Paul’s statement in Romans 5, in verse 8 he continued, “But
God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners,
Christ died for us.”
Only one individual was perfect, sinless and completely innocent, and yet
willingly gave His life for the greatestcause ofall—laying down His life as a
sacrifice for all humanity that we might live! He was the Son of God, and He
gave His life for the sins of the world (John 3:16).
He did not die only for His friends. Paul emphasized in Romans 5:6 that
“Christ died for the ungodly.” And againin Romans 6:10 we read, “Forthe
death that He died, He died to sin once for all” (emphasis added).

No one else could die for such a cause—to make forgivenessofsin, freedom
from sin and reconciliationto God possible for all humanity. It was, and will
always be, the greatestsacrificeevermade.
{code_1}
To understand this sacrifice, we must understand who Christ was
Who was Jesus Christ? In his book More Than a Carpenter, JoshMcDowell
declares that once you examine the actual claims of Jesus and His eyewitness
followers, we are left with only three options: Jesus was eithera liar, a lunatic
or our Lord.
It’s important that we know. Many years after Jesus died and was
resurrected, the apostle Paul warned about those already preaching “another
Jesus” (2 Corinthians 11:4). This is exactlywhat we see today. The Jesus
preachedtoday isn’t the Jesus we read about in the Bible in virtually
everything from His appearance to His doctrine!
Today Jesus is commonly pictured as a weak, long-haired, effeminate-looking
individual. Is this the real Jesus, the son of a carpenterwho lived in first-
century Judea? In recentyears articles have shown what an average Jew of
the first century would have lookedlike, and it’s nothing like the pictures and
icons of Jesus seenin churches and cathedrals today. Basedon biblical and
historicalrecords, these depictions are simply not accurate.
What we do know from Scripture is that the Word, the One who was born of
a virgin as Jesus Christour Savior, was “Godwith us” (Matthew 1:23) and
God “manifestedin the flesh” (1 Timothy 3:16). And in John 1 we are told
that “the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” and that “all things
were made through Him” (verses 1 and 3).
And yet He “made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a
bondservant, and coming in the likeness ofmen. And being found in
appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point
of death, even the death of the cross” (Philippians 2:7-8). Through His selfless
sacrifice, “we have been sanctifiedthrough the offering of the body of Jesus
Christ once for all” (Hebrews 10:10).

The crucifixion of Jesus Christ
Considerthe events surrounding His crucifixion. In the spring of A.D. 31, just
around midnight, a few hours after the Passoverobservance,soldiers and
religious officials arrestedJesus. TheydraggedHim first to Annas (John
18:13), the former high priest, then to Caiaphas (verse 24), the current high
priest, and the Sanhedrin or council. The two high priests and the Sanhedrin
condemned Him to death, but they neededthe approval of the Roman
authorities. So, Jesus was chargedwith blasphemy and takento Pilate, the
appointed Romangovernor.
Pilate sent Him to Herod, who questioned Him and then sent Him back to
Pilate. Finally Pilate gave the approval, and Jesus was crucifiedat about 9
a.m. (Mark 15:25) on the morning of Passoverday. This followednine hours
of interrogation, taunting and beating. About six hours later the Messiahand
Son of God died on a hill calledGolgotha (John 19:17)just outside the walls of
Jerusalem. As God in the flesh, His sacrifice was the pivotal point and most
important event in all human history.
How could God die? This is a difficult conceptfor us to understand, but we
believe what the Scriptures tell us—He died and His body was placed“in the
heart of the earth,” the tomb, for three days and three nights (Matthew
12:40).
Passoverconnects us to the death of Jesus Christ
Eachyear on the evening of the 14th day of the first month (Nisanor Abib) on
the Hebrew calendar, Godinstructs His people to participate in an annual
Passoverservice to remember and commemorate Jesus’death. (Formore on
this, see our Life, Hope & Truth video “Passover:A Lamb, THE Lamb and
You.”)

Paul declares that we must partake of this service in a worthy manner because
doing otherwise makes us “guilty of the body and blood of the Lord” (1
Corinthians 11:27). None of us is “worthy” of the sacrifice of Christ—Paulis
simply explaining that we should partake of the Passoverproperly, having
takenthe time to seriouslyreflect on what it means for us.
The Passoverservice also includes the foot-washing ceremonydescribedin
John 13, which pictures our willingness to serve one another as Christ served
us.
Paul then explained to the Corinthians, “ForI receivedfrom the Lord that
which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which
He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and
said, ‘Take, eat;this is My body which is broken for you; do this in
remembrance of Me.’
“In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, ‘This cup is
the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in
remembrance of Me.’For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup,
you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes” (1 Corinthians 11:23-26).
Through this simple, but deeply meaningful, commemoration, faithful
Christians proclaim the death of Jesus Christ. But what about His
resurrection? Certainly we should acknowledge the importance of the
resurrection, but the biblical command is to annually observe the Passover
and proclaim Jesus’death.
One must ask why, when the majority of the Christian world is busy
observing Easter, do people pay so little heed to the fact that not only is Easter
not found in Scripture, but its observances are basedon paganpractices (see
our article “Origin of Easter”)? Notonly do rabbits and eggs have nothing to
do with worshipping Christ, they denigrate the realmeaning of His death and
resurrection!
On the other hand, when baptized members of the Church of God gathereach
year for the Passover, the atmosphere for the service is subdued. It isn’t that
we are without joy and thanksgiving for what Christ did, but we are there to

reflecton a death—the death of our Savior, Jesus Christ, whose sacrifice
makes it possible for eachone of us to be reconciledto God. Our sins, which
separate us from God, are removed by this actof love.
There is so much more to the sacrifice ofJesus Christ. Everything changedon
that spring day.
In the years following Jesus’crucifixion and resurrection, His disciples turned
the world upside down with their message(Acts 17:6), and many of them died
for it. Their convictionand courage canbe tracedback to the time when the
Father raisedJesus from the dead, confirming His acceptanceofChrist’s
sacrifice (Acts 2:23-24)on a hillside outside Jerusalem.
What does that sacrifice meanto you? If you have repented and been baptized
(Acts 2:38; 20:21), how prepared are you for this year’s Passover?No one is
worthy, but eachof us must take the time to reflect on what Christ did for all
of us. Make sure you do just that and then participate in the Passover,
proclaiming the death of our Savior, the greatestsacrificeevermade.
Study more about this in our articles “Passover:What Did Jesus Do for
You?” and “Why Jesus Had to Die.” https://lifehopeandtruth.com/god/who-is-
jesus/greatest-sacrifice-ever/
The Ultimate Sacrifice
Sacrifice is not a conceptthat anyone really enjoys. Although we are hearing
the word more often these days due to price inflation in such core areas as
food and energy, most of us do everything we can to avoid having to make
sacrifices.As ironic as it sounds, we will make sacrificesin one area to
circumvent having to make a sacrifice in another! This points out the human
tendency to hold some part of our lives closerand dearer than others—andwe
are loath to let go of even a small bit of what we love the most.

Jesus Christ did not live this way. In His human life, He was all about
sacrifice—His whole life was a sacrifice. And His is the life that has been
exalted as the perfectpattern for our own.
In terms of Jesus'sacrifice,anyone familiar with the Bible will first think of
His sacrificialdeathat Calvary to atone for the sins of mankind. His
crucifixion was indeed the greatestactofsacrifice in the history of the world,
a perfect demonstration of His own teaching in John 15:13, "Greaterlove has
no one than this, than to lay down one's life for his friends." His supreme
offering of His sinless life paid the terrible costof all of mankind's sins for all
time (see Hebrews 9:26-28;10:10, 12, 14).
In John 3, speaking to Nicodemus, who later helped JosephofArimathea to
prepare Him for burial, Jesus statesa primary purpose of His incarnation:
"As Moses liftedup the serpent in the wilderness, evenso must the Son of
Man be lifted up [signifying His crucifixion]. . . . For God did not send His Son
into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might
be saved" (John 3:14, 17). He was, as describedby John the Baptist, "the
Lamb of God who takes awaythe sin of the world" (John 1:29), who was
"slainfrom the foundation of the world" (Revelation13:8). The apostle Peter
makes it personalfor us:
. . . knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or
gold, from your aimless conductreceivedby tradition from your fathers, but
with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without
spot. He indeed was foreordainedbefore the foundation of the world, but was
manifest in these last times for you. . . ." (I Peter1:18-20)
His sacrifice hadbeen prophesied in many places in the Old Testament, as in
the first recorded prophecy, Genesis 3:15:"And I will put enmity betweenyou
[the serpent, Satan] and the woman, and betweenyour seedand her Seed;He
shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel." Isaiah53:6
encapsulates the prophecy of the Suffering Servant: "All we like sheephave
gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the LORD has
laid on Him the iniquity of us all." Jesus Himself refers to the prophecy of His
death in Psalm22 with His cry from the cross, "MyGod, My God, why have

You forsakenMe?" (Psalm22:1;Matthew 27:46). Many places in the Old
Testamentshow either a need for or a hope in a coming Redeemer(see, for
instance, Job19:25; Psalm19:14; Isaiah47:4; 59:20; 63:16).
It is difficult for short-sightedhuman beings to realize how the foreknowledge
of His suffering and death must have weighedon His mind, perhaps from His
childhood, since at the age of twelve, He told Josephand Mary that He "must
be about [His] Father's business" (Luke 2:49). Knowing He had come into the
world to bear the sins of every man, woman, and child must have been an
unimaginably heavy burden for Him. It was an obligation that was constantly
before Him. Certainly, the expectationthat on His shoulders restedthe
destinies of countless billions of people was a cup—His weighty lot—that He
would gladly forgo if He could (see Luke 22:41-44). However, He was
committed to doing God's will in everything (see John 6:38; 8:28-29), so He
bore it in faith.
We must look further, deeper, beyond His sacrificialdeath to His equally
sacrificiallife. His daily walk was an example of the GoldenRule, doing for
others what we would have them do for us (see Luke 6:31). As Jesus says of
Himself, "The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give
His life a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:28). Thus, His life was dedicatedto
exhausting Himself through giving to others. The gospelaccounts relate
occasionafteroccasionwhenHe preachedor healedor castout demons or
comforted everyone who came to Him for help (see Mark 3:7-11; 6:54-56;
Luke 4:40; etc.).
Yet, He made many other sacrifices, ones thatwe do not often consider.
Perhaps the greatestone is that He never married and had children. Of
course, His Fatherhad already promised Him the church as His Bride
(Ephesians 5:25-27, 32;Revelation19:7), but He never experiencedthe joys
and comforts of having His own family. He gained all His experience in family
matters as an obedient Sonand loving Elder Brother in the house of Joseph
and Mary.
In addition, He sacrificedthings that most people prize as goodand worthy,
like ambition, wealth, prestige, position, popularity, and many other such

elements of "success." He had the wherewithal within Himself to attain any or
all of these pinnacles of human achievement, but He shunned them all for the
greaterrewardbefore Him: "Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, . . .
for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame,
and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God" (Hebrews 12:2). He
consideredHis many fleshly sacrifices as nothing comparedto the tremendous
future He would enjoy in the Kingdom of God.
This is the lessonthat the apostle Paul teaches in Philippians 3. Using his own
life as an example, he relates that he had just about anything a person could
want: the right genes, the right socialstanding, the right education, the right
enthusiasm, and the right reputation. "But," he writes:
what things were gainto me, these I have counted loss for Christ. Yet indeed I
also count all things . . . as rubbish, that I may gainChrist and be found in
Him, . . . that I may know Him and the powerof His resurrection, and the
fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if, by any means, I
may attain to the resurrectionfrom the dead. (Philippians 3:7-11)
So he advises in verse 15, "Therefore letus, as many as are mature, have this
mind." Like our SaviorJesus Christ, we must be willing to sacrifice whatever
it takes to "press toward the goalfor the prize of the upward call of God in
Christ Jesus"(verse 14). The glorious life of the coming Kingdom of God is
attained through sacrifice, and the way we know (John 14:4).
http://www.biblicaljesus.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/basics.tour/ID/14/Ultimate-
Sacrifice.htm
What act would demonstrate the greatestpowerimaginable? We can be
awestruck by mankind’s greatestengineering marvels—towering skyscrapers,
enormous dams, rockets that can take human beings into space. And then
there are the ancient masterpieces like the pyramids of Egypt, the GreatWall
of China and the Roman Colosseum.

Incredible as these wonders are, they come nowhere close to the greatest
demonstration of power ever, which was the creationof the universe. What
kind of power does it take to bring an entire universe into existence out of
nothing?
It’s ironic that even Darwinian evolutionists, who reject any role for a divine
Being, start with the premise of an already existing universe and hospitable
planet complete with laws of physics and chemistry already in place. After a
century and a half of trying, they still can offer no rationalexplanation for a
universe that came from nothing!
Yet the Bible reveals how our universe came to be: “In the beginning God
createdthe heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1, emphasis added throughout).
Here the Bible reveals what science cannottellus. It reveals a divine Creator
who brought the universe into being from nothing.
Psalms 33:6 explains it this way: “The Lord merely spoke, and the heavens
were created. He breathed the word, and all the stars were born” (New Living
Translation).
That, my friends, is power!
For years scientists had estimatedthe number of galaxies in our universe at
around 100 billion. A few months ago a group of astronomers recalculatedthe
existing data and increasedtheir estimate to two to three trillion galaxies— 20
to 30 times as many as previously thought! Such numbers are almost beyond
human comprehension.
The Bible also explains who this Being is who createdthe universe: “In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
. . .
All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that
was made” (John 1:1-3).
The apostle John here tells us that “in the beginning”—a reference back to
Genesis 1:1— two divine Beings existed, one called“the Word” and the other
called“God.” In verse 14 John further explains that “the Word became flesh

and dwelt among us,” and that this “Word” through whom all things were
made was the One who became Jesus Christ. This is further confirmed plainly
in Hebrews 1:2 and Colossians 1:16-17.
Yet, astoundingly, in the greatestactof humility and sacrifice ofall time, this
Being who brought the universe into existence gave up that astounding power
to offer His life as a sacrifice to pay the penalty for your sins and mine.
As the apostle Paul explains in Philippians 2:5-8: “Though he was God, he did
not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, he gave up his
divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a
human being. When he appeared in human form, he humbled himself in
obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross”(NLT).
The Word, the divine Being who would laterbecome the One we know as
Jesus the Messiah, was Godon the same level of existence with the Father. But
by choice He willingly emptied Himself of this glorious existence of majesty,
splendor and powerin the greatestactof humility of all time.
And because He willingly gave this up to become the sacrifice for all
mankind’s sins for all time, God the Fatherhas “elevatedhim to the place of
highest honor” and placed Him in authority over all things—“thatat the
name of Jesus every knee should bow … and every tongue confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord” (NLT, Philippians 2:9-11).
Every year at this time, the biblical Passovercommemorationreminds us of
what He gave up for us. The articles in this issue will help you better
understand and appreciate that greatestsacrifice ever!
https://www.ucg.org/beyond-today/beyond-today-magazine/the-greatest-
sacrifice
Jesus Made the Final Sacrifice Once-For-All, and Some People Don’tKnow

I watcheda duck being sacrificed.
He seemedto watch me back in the moments before his death.
I stooda few feet awayfrom it in Kathmandu’s Durbar Square, tears
streaming down my face. The duck flailed around, then laid his head on a
concrete stepin what I imagined as a display of submission and defeat,
holding eye contactwith me while I staredback.
The solemnmoment was interrupted when a man in flip-flops and Chelsea
FootballClub sweatpants slit the duck’s neck and squeezedits blood over the
statue of Bhairava, the Hindu godof annihilation.
The duck’s blood was sprinkled around, and then its body was tossedaside.
To worshipers in attendance, he was worth a few drops of blood to appease
and please Bhairava. The animal sacrifice willincline the godto grant their
wishes.
As I watchedthis unfold, I hurt for worshipers in attendance because they
have no idea they don’t need to sacrifice animals. I yearned to tell them we
have already been bought with a price by the one, true God, and no further
sacrifice is required for our redemption and salvation.
The Initiation of the GreatestSacrifice
This December, as I sing, “Joyto the world, the Lord is come,” I’ll be
reminded that Jesus came not just to live, but to die. Forme, for you, and for
the man in the soccersweatpants who sacrificeda duck to false gods then
tried to sell me Kama Sutra paintings.
Jesus’s birth was and is joyous for us, but I imagine his birth was bittersweet
for the Father, who knew he was sending his son like a lamb to its slaughter.
Jesus’s entrance into the world was the first step towardreconciling sinful
humanity and sinless God. And the sacrifice ofJesus as the payment for our
sins was public, torturous, and without any semblance of honor.

“Faith in the risen Christ is all we need for unfettered accessto God, who
permanently views us through the lens of his Son’s righteousness.”
God the Father is pleasedin the perfectlife of the Son. And his sacrifice—the
sacrifice ofthe perfect, spotless Lamb—is what was required to overcome sin
for all time. Isaiah hauntingly said that it pleasedthe Father to bruise the Son
and put him to grief as an offering for sin (Isa. 53:10). His Son was the
offering that would end all other offerings (Isa. 1:11) and return the wayward
bride back to her Groom (Isa. 62:4).
The duck sacrifice I witnessedcando no such thing. The Nepalese continually
slay birds, goats, andother animals to appease their gods. Theybelieve blood
sacrifices are required to obtain blessings, escape curses, orreceive
forgiveness. Theyhave no idea the perfectsacrifice has been made once and
for all on their behalf.
Complete in Christ
I wouldn’t have done well in Old Testamenttimes. I would have been a bundle
of nerves and tears. I love animals, and the remains of sacrificedducks, goats,
and buffalos that littered Nepal’s capital city nearly made me sick. But their
scatteredbodies made me imagine what it might have been like to live when
animal sacrificeswere neededfor atonement of sin and were used as
voluntary offerings in worship.
Under the old covenant, God’s people offeredanimal sacrifices onthe regular
for sin offerings and as free acts of worship (Lev. 1–3;6:8–23;7:11–34;8:18–
21; 16:24). Mostmandatory sacrificesrequired blood to be spilt, whether
bulls, goats, rams, or doves (Lev. 4; 5:1–19;6:1–7;24–30;7:1–6;8:14–17;
16:3–22).
Thankfully, that era is over, completedby the Word of God incarnate (John
1:4; Matt. 5:17–18), who took on flesh in Bethlehem. But for millions in South
Asia, the era of curse and sacrifice continues in the practice of their Hindu
faith.
The PresentReality

Many Hindus sacrifice animals as a regular part of life, particularly during
certain religious festivals. During the Nepalifestival Dashain, Hindus sacrifice
animals for a variety of reasons—to reenactactions ofa defeateddemon
army, to petition protection from evil powers, to abate the rage of bloodthirsty
gods and goddesses,and to celebrate good’s triumph over evil.
Hindus also presentofferings of garlands, coconuts, andflowers in temples
and at idol altars. Temple attendants smear red dye on the worshipers’
foreheads to symbolize a blessing, then break the offeredcoconuts and
sprinkle the juice over the idols. These rituals earn worshipers an audience
with the godthey want to petition.
A man breaks a coconuton an altar before Kali, the goddess ofdestruction.
As Christians, we are able to enter God’s presence at any time and in any
place (Heb. 4:16) because we have been redeemed through Christ’s sacrifice
(Heb. 10:1–10). Goatsand calves were not sufficient, so “he enteredthe Most
Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption”
(Heb. 9:12).
Jesus’s sacrificeusheredin a system whereby we don’t gain God’s affections
through our attempts at righteousness. Faithin the risen Christ is all we need
for unfettered accessto God, who permanently views us through the lens of
his Son’s righteousness (2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 3:21–26;1 Cor. 1:30).
In the past, I’ve tended to glaze over these passages.Now, having watchedthe
blood of an animal spilled over the paganaltar of a god who is not alive, I
have a renewedsense of gratitude for God’s issuance ofthe New Covenant
through Christ.
What Are We Repeating?
What truly pains my heart is the fact that the men and women offering these
sacrifices willmeet the end of their days and not be reunited with their
Creator—unless theyhear and receive the gospel. I wish I could unsee the
sacrifice. But, I know that my experience deepenedmy understanding of the

gospeland further clarified the need to proclaim it to those who’ve not
believed.
Millions of people around the world continue to make sacrifices to false gods,
unaware of the final and ultimate sacrifice. The harvestis great, but the
workers are few. During this Christmas season, let’s once againcommit
ourselves to repeatthe sounding joy of our Savior’s birth so that all may hear
and know that he is God.
Caroline Anderson is a writer and photographer with the IMB. She currently
lives in SoutheastAsia. Her childhood in Asia consistedoftwo important
ingredients: braving hot chili peppers and telling people about Jesus.
Messagefor THE LORD'S DAY MORNING, May29, 2016 ChristianHope
Church of Christ, Plymouth, North Carolina by Reggie A. Braziel, Minister
TOPIC: SpecialDaySermons, Memorial DayTOPIC: Special
Day Sermons, MemorialDay TOPIC: SpecialDaySermons, Memorial
Day TOPIC: SpecialDaySermons, MemorialDay
“Remembering The GreatestSacrifice” “Remembering The Greatest
Sacrifice” “Remembering The GreatestSacrifice”“Remembering The
GreatestSacrifice” (A MemorialDay Message) Romans 5:6-
11 (NKJV) Romans 5:6-11 (NKJV) Romans 5:6-11 (NKJV)
Romans 5:6-11 (NKJV)
I would ask you to open your Bibles to Romans chapter 5 Romans chapter 5
Romans chapter 5 Romans chapter 5. .. . And please follow along with me as I
read verses 6-11. verses 6-11.verses 6-11.verses 6-11.
ROMANS 5:6-11 ROMANS 5:6-11 ROMANS 5:6-11 ROMANS 5:6-11
(NKJV) (NKJV) (NKJV) (NKJV)

6 For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the
ungodly.
7 For scarcelyfor a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good
man someone would even dare to die.
8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still
sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be
savedfrom wrath through Him.
10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciledto God through the
death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by
His life.
11 And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus
Christ, through whom we have now receivedthe reconciliation.
I N T R O D U C T I O N I N T R O D U C T I O N I N T R O D U C T I O
N I N T R O D U C T I O N
There’s a story about a city fella who was visiting relatives on a farm and the
farmer gave a whistle and his dog herded the cattle into the corral, then
latched the gate with her paw.
The city slickersaid, "Wow, that’s some dog you've gotthere. What’s her
"Wow, that’s some dog you've gotthere. What’s her "Wow, that’s some dog
you've gotthere. What’s her "Wow, that’s some dog you've got there. What’s
her name?" name?" name?" name?" The forgetful farmer thought a minute,
then asked, "Whatdo you "Whatdo you "Whatdo you "What do you call
that red flower that callthat red flowerthat call that red flower that callthat
red flowerthat smells real goodand smells real goodand smells realgood
and smells real goodand has thorns on the stem?" has thorns on the stem?"
has thorns on the stem?" has thorns on the stem?" The city slickersaid, "A
rose?" "Arose?" "Arose?" "Arose?" "Yeah, that’s it!" "Yeah, that’s it!"
"Yeah, that’s it!" "Yeah, that’s it!" The farmer turned to his wife and said,
"Hey Rose, whatdid we name this dog?" "Hey Rose, whatdid we name this

dog?" "Hey Rose, whatdid we name this dog?" "Hey Rose, whatdid we
name this dog?"
One of our greatesthuman weaknesses is that WE TEND TO WE TEND TO
WE TEND TO WE TEND TO FORGET. FORGET. FORGET. FORGET.
We forgetwhere we put our keys. We forgetwhere we left our glasses. We
forgetwhere we parked at Wal-Mart. We walk into a room and forgetwhy
we are there. We are a forgetful We are a forgetful We are a forgetful We are
a forgetful people! people! people!people!
Illustration: Illustration: Illustration: Illustration: A few weeks ago Ihad
an appointment at the SleepClinic in Greenville. The doctor
lookedover my medical history and saw that I have had a
problem with sleepapnea for a number of years now. She
askedme to explain some of the ways my sleepapnea is
affecting me. I told her, “I am “I am “I am “I am becoming
more and more forgetful and I'm having a becoming more
and more forgetful and I'm having a becoming more and
more forgetful and I'm having a becoming more and more
forgetful and I'm having a terrible problem with my
concentration.” terrible problem with my concentration.”
terrible problem with my concentration.” terrible problem
with my concentration.”
She told me very politely, “Mr. Braziel, these things “Mr. Braziel, these
things “Mr. Braziel, these things “Mr. Braziel, these things
happen as we getolder. This may have more to do with
your age than with the sleepapnea.” your age than with
the sleepapnea.” your age than with the sleepapnea.”
your age than with the sleepapnea.” Needless to say, that
wasn't what I wantedto hear. And even worse, Linda was
sitting right there and she heard it too.

Becauseofour tendency to forget things we need things to help us remember.
This is why we make a list before we go to the grocery. make a list before we
go to the grocery. make a list before we go to the grocery. make a list before
we go to the grocery. This is why we write down appointments on the
calendar. write down appointments on the calendar. write down
appointments on the calendar. write down appointments on the calendar.
This is why we leave ourselves “stickynotes. we leave ourselves “stickynotes.
we leave ourselves “stickynotes. we leave ourselves “stickynotes. This is why
us guys put a put a put a put a stickeron the windshield to remind us when
its time to change stickeron the windshield to remind us when its time to
change stickeron the windshield to remind us when its time to change sticker
on the windshield to remind us when its time to change the oil. the oil. the
oil. the oil. We need “reminders.” We need things to help us
remember.
Something else that helps us to remember is MEMORIALS. MEMORIALS.
MEMORIALS. MEMORIALS.
Every gravestone in every cemeteryacross the world is a aa a memorial
memorial memorial memorial to those who have lived and died.
Sometimes we drive across A MEMORIAL BRIDGE A MEMORIAL
BRIDGE A MEMORIALBRIDGE A MEMORIALBRIDGE or on a
MEMORIAL HIGHWAY MEMORIALHIGHWAY MEMORIAL
HIGHWAY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY named in memory of some noble
individual who left their mark on humanity.
In WashingtonD.C. there are Memorials Memorials Memorials Memorials
to Presidents Presidents Presidents Presidents Washington, Lincoln, and
Jefferson. Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson. Washington,
Lincoln, and Jefferson. Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson.
And there are Memorials to Commemorate eachof the Memorials to
Commemorate eachof the Memorials to Commemorate eachof the
Memorials to Commemorate eachof the wars we have fought in.

wars we have fought in. wars we have fought in. wars we have
fought in.
MEMORIALS help us to REMEMBER. MEMORIALS help us to
REMEMBER. MEMORIALS help us to REMEMBER. MEMORIALS
help us to REMEMBER. Tomorrow is MEMORIAL DAY, MEMORIAL
DAY, MEMORIALDAY, MEMORIAL DAY, a day when we pause to
remember the greatsacrifice of those brave remember the greatsacrifice of
those brave remember the greatsacrifice ofthose brave remember the great
sacrifice ofthose brave men and women who gave their lives for our freedom.
men and womenwho gave their lives for our freedom. men and women who
gave their lives for our freedom. men and womenwho gave their lives for
our freedom.
Many of the 1.1 million soldiers 1.1 million soldiers 1.1 million soldiers 1.1
million soldiers who have died in service to our country were just eighteen
or nineteen year old boys right out of High School. Theynever gotto go to
college, orgetmarried, or have a career. Theysacrificedtheir all for us. They
sacrificedtheir all for us. They sacrificedtheir all for us. They sacrificedtheir
all for us.
We did NOTHING to deserve their sacrifice. We were not worthy of their
sacrifice. Yetthey freely laid down their lives for all of us. “ ““ “Greater
love hath no man than this Greaterlove hath no man than this Greaterlove
hath no man than this Greaterlove hath no man than this, that a man lay
down his life that a man lay down his life that a man lay down his life that a
man lay down his life for his friends. for his friends. for his friends. for his
friends. “ (John 15:13) (John 15:13) (John 15:13)(John 15:13)
And t And t And t And think of the COST to all those moms and dads hink of
the COST to all those moms and dads hink of the COST to all those moms
and dads hink of the COST to all those moms and dads who sent their sons off
to war only to get them back in a flag-draped casket.

And t And t And t And think of the COST to all those wives hink of the COST
to all those wives hink of the COST to all those wives hink of the COST to all
those wives who said a tearful goodbye to their soldier husband at the train
station or airport, who became widowedat a very young age.
And t And t And t And think of the COST to all those little children in this
country hink of the COST to all those little children in this country hink of the
COST to all those little children in this country hink of the COST to all those
little children in this country who grew up without a daddy who losthis life on
a battlefield.
And think of the COST to the thousands of girlfriends And think of the COST
to the thousands of girlfriends And think of the COST to the thousands of
girlfriends And think of the COST to the thousands of girlfriends who sent
their soldier boyfriend off to war with the promise of marriage when he got
home, who had their hopes and dreams shattered by an enemy bullet.
As President Abraham Lincoln once said, “Warat best is terrible!” “Warat
best is terrible!” “War at best is terrible!” “Warat best is terrible!”
Here in our scripture text in Romans chapter five, Romans chapterfive,
Romans chapter five, Romans chapter five, the apostle Paul reminds us of
another who sacrificedHis life for us; not a soldier, not a soldier, not a soldier,
not a soldier, but OUR SAVIOR. but OUR SAVIOR. but OUR SAVIOR.
but OUR SAVIOR. Let's take a few minutes to “REMEMBERTHE
REMEMBERTHE REMEMBER THE REMEMBER THE GREATEST
SACRIFICE OF ALL.” GREATEST SACRIFICEOF ALL.” GREATEST
SACRIFICE OF ALL.” GREATEST SACRIFICEOF ALL.”
First of all, let's consider......
I. II.. I. Our GreatOur GreatOur GreatOur Great UNWORTHINESS
UNWORTHINESS UNWORTHINESSUNWORTHINESS
1. Justas you and I are unworthy of the sacrifice unworthy of the sacrifice
unworthy of the sacrifice unworthy of the sacrifice allof our brave

soldiers made for us, we are even more unworthy of evenmore unworthy of
even more unworthy of even more unworthy of the sacrifice OUR
SAVIOR made for us. the sacrifice OUR SAVIOR made for us.
the sacrifice OUR SAVIOR made for us. the sacrifice OUR SAVIOR
made for us.
2. Pauluses four terms in this passage to describe just how unworthy
you and I are of Christ's sacrifice on our behalf.
(A) ((AA)) (A) We were We were We were We were HELPLESS
HELPLESS HELPLESS HELPLESS (v.6a)(v.6a) (v.6a) (v.6a)
“Forwhen we were still without strength.........”“Forwhenwe were still
without strength.........” “Forwhen we were still without strength.........”“For
when we were still without strength.........”
That word “strength” strength” strength” strength” means “helpless.”
“Forwhen we “helpless.” “Forwhen we “helpless.” “Forwhen we
“helpless.” “Forwhen we were helpless......
were helpless...... were helpless...... were
helpless......
You and I were “totallyhelpless” “totally helpless” “totallyhelpless”
“totally helpless” to save ourselves. Abraham was helpless to
save himself. David was helpless Abraham was helpless to save himself.
David was helpless Abraham was helpless to save himself. David was helpless
Abraham was helpless to save himself. David was helpless
to save himself. Moses andElijah were helpless to save to
save himself. Moses andElijah were helpless to save to
save himself. Moses andElijah were helpless to save to
save himself. Moses andElijah were helpless to save
themselves. themselves. themselves.
themselves.
Reg Brazielwas helpless to save himself. Edwin Price was Reg Brazielwas
helpless to save himself. Edwin Price was Reg Brazielwas helpless to save

himself. Edwin Price was Reg Brazielwas helpless to save himself. Edwin
Price was helpless to save himself. Miss Margie......Miss
Marie.....and helpless to save himself. Miss Margie......Miss
Marie.....and Mr. Archie were helpless to save themselves.
Every last one Mr. Archie were helpless to save themselves.
Every last one of us was “helpless”to save ourselves.
of us was “helpless”to save ourselves. of us was “helpless”
to save ourselves. of us was “helpless” to save ourselves.
Why? Becausewe were “spiritually dead.” Deadmen
are helpless. Deadmen are powerless. Deadmen are without strength! In
Ephesians 2:1 Ephesians 2:1 Ephesians 2:1 Ephesians 2:1 Paul tells us we
were “dead in our trespasses andsins.” “dead in our trespassesand sins.”
“deadin our trespassesand sins.” “deadin our trespassesandsins.” We
couldn't be good enough....ormoral enough.....orperfect
enough to save ourselves. We were so “helpless” we neededa
SAVIOR to We were so “helpless” we neededa SAVIOR to We were so
“helpless” we neededa SAVIOR to We were so “helpless” we neededa
SAVIOR to makes us ALIVE SPIRITUALLY! makes us
ALIVE SPIRITUALLY! makes us ALIVE SPIRITUALLY! makes us ALIVE
SPIRITUALLY!
Next Paul tells us....... Next Paul tells us....... Next Paul tells us.......
Next Paul tells us.......
(B) ((BB)) (B) We were We were We were We were UNGODLY
UNGODLY UNGODLY UNGODLY (v. 6) (v. 6) (v. 6) (v. 6)
v.6 Forwhen we were still v.6 Forwhen we were still v.6 Forwhen we
were still v.6 Forwhen we were still without strength without strength
without strength without strength, in due time , in due time , in due time , in

due time Christ died for
Christ died for Christ died for
Christ died for the ungodly the ungodly the ungodly the ungodly.” ..”” .”
The GODLY ONE died for the ungodly ones. GODLY ONE died for
the ungodly ones. GODLYONE died for the ungodly ones. GODLYONE
died for the ungodly ones.
The HOLY ONE died for the unholy ones. HOLY ONE died for the unholy
ones. HOLY ONE died for the unholy ones. HOLY ONE died for the unholy
ones.
The PERFECTONE died for the imperfect ones. PERFECT ONE died for
the imperfect ones. PERFECT ONE diedfor the imperfect ones. PERFECT
ONE died for the imperfect ones.
The RIGHTEOUS ONE died for the unrighteous ones. RIGHTEOUS ONE
died for the unrighteous ones. RIGHTEOUS ONE died for the unrighteous
ones. RIGHTEOUS ONE died for the unrighteous ones.
To be “ungodly” “ungodly” “ungodly” “ungodly” means to be
“unlike GOD.” “unlike GOD.” “unlike GOD.” “unlike GOD.” There
was a time in our lives when we were without without without without
fear for GOD.....withoutreverence forGOD......without
respectfor GOD. respectfor GOD.
respectfor GOD. respectfor GOD. We didn't
think godly thoughts. godly thoughts. godly thoughts. godly thoughts.
We didn't have godly desires. godly desires. godlydesires. godlydesires. We
didn't live by godly ways. We were UNGODLY
people! godly ways. We were UNGODLY people! godly ways. We were
UNGODLY people! godly ways. We were UNGODLY people!
Next Paul tells us...... Next Paul tells us...... Next Paul tells us...... Next
Paul tells us......

(C) We were (C) We were (C) We were (C) We were SINNERS
SINNERS SINNERS SINNERS (v.8) (v.8) (v.8) (v.8)
v.8 vv..88 v.8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that But God
demonstrates His own love toward us, in that But God demonstrates His own
love toward us, in that But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that
while we were while we were
while we were while we were still sinners still sinners
still sinners still sinners, Christ died for us. , Christ died for us. , Christ died
for us. , Christ died for us.
To “sin” “sin” “sin” “sin” means to “miss the mark.” Romans 3:23 “miss
the mark.” Romans 3:23 “miss the mark.” Romans 3:23 “miss the mark.”
Romans 3:23 says, “For“For“For“For all.....
all..... all..... all.....ALL ALL ALL ALL
have sinned and have sinned and have sinned and have sinned and fall short
fall short fall short fall short of the glory of GOD.” of the glory of GOD.” of
the glory of GOD.” ofthe glory of GOD.”
Like the proud Pharisees, many Christians have a self
righteous attitude that just because they have been going to
Church their whole lives that makes them a pretty decent
person. LISTEN! Even if you have been going to Church
since the day you were born, you have still “missedthe mark” over and over
and over again! “missedthe mark” over and over and over again! “missed
the mark” over and over and overagain! “missedthe mark” over and over
and over again! Even on the very best days of our lives, you
and I have “fallenfar “fallenfar “fallen far “fallen far short
of the glory of GOD.” short of the glory of GOD.”
short of the glory of GOD.” short of the glory of GOD.”
Our most righteous acts are as “filthy rags.” “filthy rags.” “filthy rags.”
“filthy rags.” Everyone of us has “stinky feet.” “stinkyfeet.”
“stinky feet.” “stinkyfeet.” Everyone of us has “stained“stained“stained
“stained underwear.” underwear.” underwear.” underwear.” And

every last one of us is A SINNER! A SINNER! A SINNER! A SINNER!
And without JESUS CHRIST we are absolutely HOPELESS!
We were HELPLESS......wewere UNGODLY......wewere We were
HELPLESS......wewere UNGODLY......wewere We were HELPLESS......we
were UNGODLY......wewere We were HELPLESS......wewere
UNGODLY......wewere SINNERS......butwait, Paul isn't done yet. He also
tells us..... SINNERS......butwait, Paul isn't done yet. He also tells us.....
SINNERS......butwait, Paul isn't done yet. He also tells us.....
SINNERS......butwait, Paul isn't done yet. He also tells us.....
(D) ((DD)) (D) We were God's We were God's We were God's We were God's
ENEMIES ENEMIESENEMIES ENEMIES (v.10) (v.10) (v.10) (v.10)
v. vv.. v.10 Forif when we were enemies when we were enemies when we
were enemies when we were enemies we were reconciledto God through
the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be
savedby His life.
None of us likes to think of ourselves as “enemies ofGod,” “enemies of God,”
“enemies of God,” “enemies ofGod,” but before one accepts Jesus Christas
Lord and Savior that is exactly what he is; an “enemy of
God”......”one who is an “enemy of God”......”one who is an “enemy of
God”......”one who is an “enemy of God”......”one who is
hostile towardGod,”.........”one who is opposedto God.”
3. We were HELPLESS.......wewere UNGODLY.......wewere We were
HELPLESS.......wewere UNGODLY.......we were We were HELPLESS.......we
were UNGODLY.......wewere We were HELPLESS.......wewere
UNGODLY.......wewere SINNERS......wewere GOD'S ENEMIES.
How greatwas our SINNERS......we were GOD'S ENEMIES. How
greatwas our SINNERS......we were GOD'S ENEMIES. How great
was our SINNERS......we were GOD'SENEMIES. How greatwas

our UNWORTHINESS! UNWORTHINESS!
UNWORTHINESS! UNWORTHINESS!
Secondly, let's consider.......
II. IIII.. II. Our Savior's GreatOur Savior's GreatOur Savior's GreatOur
Savior's GreatSACRIFICE SACRIFICE SACRIFICE SACRIFICE (vs. 6-8)
(vs. 6-8) (vs. 6-8) (vs. 6-8)
6 For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the
ungodly.
7 For scarcelyfor a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good
man someone would even dare to die.
8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still
sinners, Christ died for us.
1. CHRIST did the utmost for us when we were the least deserving of it.
2. Four times in these three short verses, Paulreminds us Christ died
for us. Christ died for us. Christ died for us. Christ died for us.
v. 6 “ Christ v. 6 “ Christ v. 6 “ Christ v. 6 “ Christ DIED DIED DIED
DIED for the ungodly.” for the ungodly.” for the ungodly.” for the ungodly.”
v. 7. “Forscarcelyfor a righteous man will one v. 7. “Forscarcelyfor a
righteous man will one v. 7. “Forscarcelyfora righteous man will one v. 7.
“Forscarcelyfor a righteous man will one DIE DDIIEE DIE, ,, ,
yet perhaps for a goodman someone would even yet
perhaps for a goodman someone wouldeven yet
perhaps for a goodman someone wouldeven yet
perhaps for a goodman someone wouldeven dare to
dare to dare to dare to DIE
DDIIEE DIE.” ..”” .”
v.8 “But God demonstrates His ownlove toward us, in v.8 “But God
demonstrates His own love toward us, in v.8 “But God demonstrates His own
love toward us, in v.8 “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in

that while we were yet sinners, Christ that while we
were yet sinners, Christ that while we were yet sinners,
Christ that while we were yet sinners, Christ DIED
DIED DIED DIED for for for for us.”
us.” us.” us.”
3. Though we were HELPLESS HELPLESS HELPLESS
HELPLESS Christ died for us! Though we were UNGODLY
UNGODLY UNGODLY UNGODLY Christ died for us! Though we
were SINNERS SINNERS SINNERSSINNERS Christdied for us!
Though we were GOD'S ENEMIES GOD'S ENEMIESGOD'S ENEMIES
GOD'S ENEMIES Christdied for us!
4. Christ didn't die for us because we were lovable or deserving or
worthy. He didn't die for us because He saw potential in us. He died
for us because we were absolutelypowerless to save ourselves.
5. He became our sacrifice. our sacrifice. our sacrifice. our sacrifice.
He became our substitute. our substitute. our substitute. our substitute.
He took our punishment. took our punishment. took our punishment. took
our punishment. He gotwhat we deserved. what we deserved. what we
deserved. what we deserved.
Love sent my Savior to die in my stead, Love sent my Saviorto
die in my stead, Love sent my Saviorto die in my stead, Love sent my Savior
to die in my stead, Why should He love me so?
Why should He love me so? Why should He love me so?
Why should He love me so? Meeklyto Calvary's cross
He was led, Meeklyto Calvary's cross He was led,
Meeklyto Calvary's cross He was led, Meeklyto
Calvary's cross He was led, Why should He love me so?
Why should He love me so? Why should He love me
so? Why should He love me so?

Why should my Savior to Calvary go, Why should my
Savior to Calvary go, Why should my Savior to
Calvary go, Why should my Savior to Calvary go,
Why should He love me so? Why should He love me
so? Why should He love me so?
Why should He love me so?
6. Until we come to see our total depravity, and
worthlessness, andour powerlessness to save ourselves, we cannot
fully appreciate the love and the love and the love and the love and
sacrifice Jesus made for us. sacrifice Jesusmade for us.
sacrifice Jesus made for us. sacrifice Jesusmade for us.
7. You see, for the Christian, everyday should be everyday should be
everyday should be everyday should be MEMORIALDAY.
MEMORIAL DAY. MEMORIALDAY.
MEMORIAL DAY. Every day we ought to remember remember remember
remember the greatsacrifice Christ made for us, and give
thanks the greatsacrifice Christ made for us, and give thanks
the greatsacrifice Christmade for us, and give thanks the great
sacrifice Christ made for us, and give thanks to GOD for His
unspeakable gift. to GOD for His unspeakable gift.
to GOD for His unspeakable gift. to GOD for His unspeakable
gift.
C O N C L U S I O N C O N C L U S I O N C O N C L U S I O N C O N C L U
S I O N
Eachyear a third grade teacherwould tell her students the story of “The
“The “The “The Ant and The Grasshopper.” Ant and The Grasshopper.”
Ant and The Grasshopper.” Ant and The Grasshopper.” All summer long
the ant workedhard the ant workedhard the ant workedhard the ant
workedhard to story up food for the cold winter months while the
grasshopperplayed and jumped while the grasshopperplayed and jumped
while the grasshopperplayed and jumped while the grasshopperplayed and

jumped around all day long. around all day long. around all day long.
around all day long. When the cold, winter months came, the ant had plenty,
while the helpless grasshopperhad nothing.
The teacherwould then give her students write how they thought the story
should end.
*Some students wrote about THE ANT sharing his food with the THE ANT
sharing his food with the THE ANT sharing his food with the THE ANT
sharing his food with the GRASSHOPPER so they both survived the
winter. GRASSHOPPER so theyboth survived the winter.
GRASSHOPPERso they both survived the winter. GRASSHOPPERso
they both survived the winter.
*Other students wrote about how the GRASSHOPPER didn't deserve how
the GRASSHOPPER didn't deserve how the GRASSHOPPERdidn't deserve
how the GRASSHOPPER didn't deserve any food since he played all
summer long, and he died during the winter. any food since he played
all summer long, and he died during the winter. any foodsince he
played all summer long, and he died during the winter. any food since
he played all summer long, and he died during the winter.
But one little boy wrote an ending unlike anything the teacherhad ever seen
in all her years of giving this writing assignment. He wrote: “The ant He
wrote: “The ant He wrote: “The ant He wrote: “The ant gave the
grasshoppereverything he had, and he died, so the grasshoppercould gave
the grasshoppereverything he had, and he died, so the grasshoppercould
gave the grasshoppereverything he had, and he died, so the grasshopper
could gave the grasshoppereverything he had, and he died, so the
grasshoppercould live.” live.” live.” live.” And down at the bottom
of his sheetof paper, the little boy drew a picture of a cross.
Today and every day LET US REMEMBER THE GREATESTLET US
REMEMBERTHE GREATEST LET US REMEMBER THE GREATEST
LET US REMEMBER THE GREATESTSACRIFICE OF ALL!
SACRIFICE OF ALL! SACRIFICE OF ALL!

The GreatestSacrifice – Why did Jesus forgive those who crucified Him?
View Larger Image
Happy Thoughts!
This earth was once treaded upon by a Messiah, who not only forgave people,
but also embraceda painful death to absolve their sins. He embraced death
for the upliftment of mankind. He even forgave those who betrayed him and
those who crucified him. It is the greatestform of forgiveness andsacrifice
ever known.
Christmas is an opportune time to understand this sacrifice and see how it
practically applies to our lives. Christmas is one of the two most important,
revered and widely observedChristian festivals;the secondone being Easter.
While Christmas is of a celebratorykind, Easterhas a more serious
undertone. Both the festivals are given equal importance in the Christian faith
all over the world. Christmas is the day when this Messiahwas born, while
Easteris the day when here turned back to life after being crucified on the
preceding Friday, thus marking it as the Day of Resurrection.
Every festival has a specific purpose, a particular reasonfor which it is
observed. It can be truly celebratedonly if this purpose is understood and
fulfilled. Without clarity of purpose, all that remain are mere formalities and
empty rituals. People form their own opinions and assumptions about festivals

without digging in to find out the real crux. The purpose of this day is to
remember what Jesus wouldwant from us; what he would expectus to do.
Understanding the deepermessage thatthe incidents from Jesus’life conveys,
can give true happiness. Those who don’t understand the profoundness,
grieve the loss and those who understand the superficial meaning, take this
day as a mere routine ritual. A sincere seekerofthe truth would contemplate
on the true meaning; he would dig deeperto find the missing link in his
understanding.
Jesus was not bound by those who were crucifying his body. His was a free
choice to sacrifice his physical body for the cause of humanity. His sole motive
of life and also of physical death was to serve the divine purpose. This free
choice canonly emerge where there is higher consciousness, where life is not
constrainedby any tendencies or compulsions, where one is rooted in the firm
conviction of one’s true nature as pure consciousness,beyond the physical
body. It is time to contemplate the divine purpose of our life.
If someone were to tell you that a certainperson has takenbirth with the sole
purpose of dying, it may sound illogicaland even nonsensical. One may
wonder, “Why would someone be born with the purpose of dying?” And yet,
Jesus fulfilled this higher purpose through the highest sacrifice.
When Jesus was being crucified, he soughtforgiveness for those who were
crucifying him: “Please forgive them, for they do not know what they are
doing” Jesus wantedtheir folly to be forgiven firstly because he could see that
they could never really achieve what they were trying. By crucifying him, they
would put an end to his physical form, but the Christ – the living essence –
would continue to live on. It is like trying to bury one’s own shadow!If you
dig a ditch and positionyour shadow overit, you cannotcover up your
shadow. So what they were trying was never going to happen.
It is crucial to understand who you are actually dealing with, in all your
actions. If you slap a rock, what effectwould it bear upon you? And if you
slap a tree trunk, what effectwould the actionbear upon you? And what if
you do it to an animal? Further, if you slap a human, how would the karma
bear upon you? And now, if you were to slap the president of a nation, can

you imagine its consequence?The actionbeing the same, its karmic effect
differs, depending on the level of consciousnessthat you are dealing with.
As we progress onthe path of spirituality, we learn that all our dealings are
with God Himself. Whatever we do, we do unto Him; whatever we give, we
give unto Him, and whatever we get, we getfrom Him. When this
understanding sinks in, the result of every deed comes back magnified beyond
our imagination. When you do something, either with a negative intention ora
positive one, its result comes back to you multiplied many times. This is the
law of nature.
Jesus couldsee the effectthat such a sinful actwould have, because those
crucifying him were committing the acton the highest consciousness. They
were doing it toGod Himself. Such a gruesome deedwould severelybear upon
those crucifying him and also upon the onlookers,eventhough they weren’t
actually partaking in it. In boundless compassion, Jesus wasasking
forgiveness forthem all.
Forgivenessis a virtue that can help us absolve ourselves of the past and pave
the wayfor our growthand happiness. Forgiving helps us live in the present.
It helps us move on without anger, contempt, resentment, and guilt.
We go through various situations in life and deal with different people.
Intentionally or unintentionally we hurt others or others might hurt us. But at
the end of the day – can we seek forgivenessforacts done by us? How many
people have we truly been able to forgive? And how many have we still not?
To our surprise, we might perhaps find that the number of such people,
including ourself, could be more than we could imagine. On this auspicious
day, let us take time to forgive people around us and seek forgivenessfrom
those whom we may have hurt, even unintentionally.
Further let this day be an opportunity to contemplate on what is it that Jesus
would want from us? What is the higher will? What is the purpose of being
born?
The Above Article is an excerpt from the book:Why Jesus Didn’t Work A
Miracle During Crucifixion

The Ultimate Sacrifice
Jesus paid the highestprice for you and me because He loves us more than we
could ever imagine.
Written by GodLife on 01/04/2017
Series:WeeklyDevotional
Tags:Jesus, Sacrifice
"ForGod so loved the world, that He gave His only begottenSon, that
whoeverbelieves in Him shall not perish, but have eternallife."ForGod did
not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might
be saved through Him.
John 3:16-17
Jesus paid the highestprice for you and me because He loves us more than we
could ever imagine. He was put to death by being crucified on a cross, and his
body was laid in a tomb behind a stone. He lived and then died rejectedand
alone. Like a rose He was trampled on the ground. Jesus took the fall and
thought of you ABOVE ALL !
Here are 8 biblical terms to think about. As we learn about these words
during Easter, we canappreciate the reasonwe celebrate.
REPENTANCE
Repentance is not just saying, "I'm sorry." It's turning away from the sin that
separatedus from God; reaching out, instead, to receive God's forgiveness
and the new life he offers. Repentance is necessaryfor salvation(Acts 3:19).
We must agree with God about our sin and turn toward him. We do not need
to be perfectbefore we come to God, and we will still sin while we’re in this
human body. But too often we shrug off our sins by saying, "Well, God's

forgiven me, so I'm okay." Thatis not repentance. Repentance puts actionto
our words. True repentance means letting the forgiveness you’ve experienced
change your life.
FORGIVENESS
Throughout history, Godhas been merciful and forgiving to those who repent
of their sin. But that doesn't mean forgiveness is automatic. Because the
penalty for sin is death, God’s law says there can be no forgiveness without
the sacrifice ofa life. Jesus death paid the ultimate price, and now our sins are
wiped out, gone forever. It is true that we will still sin in this life, but God
continues to forgive us when we come to him (1 John 1:9)
SACRIFICE
A true sacrifice involves giving up something that is cherished. It is no
accidentthat the Crucifixion and Resurrectionoccurredduring Passover. As
the most important sacrifice in the Old Testament, Passoverpaints the most
vivid picture of the greatestsacrifice evermade: the one made by God the
Father and his Son, Jesus Christ. Jesus sacrificedhis place in heaven to
become human; he then sacrificedhis life by dying on the cross to pay the
price for our sins (Philippians 2:8). Giving our total lives as a living sacrifice
to him is our natural and appropriate response ofworship (Romans 12:1)
SALVATION
Some people callfor God to save them only when they are desperate and in
immediate danger. In the Old Testament, whenGod's people called out to him
for salvation, they were looking for deliverance from their enemies. We may
not have an army on our doorstep, but we’re all in immediate danger from the
effects and consequencesofsin. We can’t save ourselves from this— we need a
rescue operation. Thankfully, God executedthe rescue operationfor
salvation. He sent his Son to save the world by paying the penalty for sin and
bringing us back to God (John 3:16-17). Our salvationis the accomplishment
of the Crucifixion and Resurrection—the beautiful fruit of Easter..
CROSS

The cross points to God's rescue plan of the world. When we think of the
cross, we should think of Jesus Christ, who was painfully stretchedout and
nailed to it, whose blood was shed, whose side was piercedand whose death
paid the price of all sin (Isaiah53:5). Without Jesus'death on a cross,
Christians cannotinherit God's gift of salvation. We also associatethe cross
with Christ's call on our life. He asks us to take up our own cross, in denial of
ourselves and in commitment to him (Mark 8:34).
GRAVE
Christians have eternallife, but it doesn't mean we’ll never die a physical
death. We all have to leave this life sometime. But Jesus'empty grave means
we don’t have to fear death anymore. In fact, we're told that he defeated
death and Hades. His resurrectionmeans that we can have life even after our
bodies die and that one day our bodies will be raised anew (Romans 6:4).We
can live in peace with the Lord forever.
RESURRECTION
The resurrectionis evidence of God's satisfactionwith the Son's sacrifice on
humanity's behalf (1 Peter1:3-5). The Holy Spirit brought Christ to life again.
That same Holy Spirit dwells within believers;therefore, Christians cantrust
that we, too, will rise to eternallife after we experience physicaldeath. All of
these truths are celebratedin words of joy that ring out eachEasterin many
different languages:"The Lord is Risen! He is risen indeed!"
JESUS
Jesus paid the penalty for the sins of all humankind on the cross. Buried in a
borrowedtomb, he rose againthree days later as proof that his mission to
conquer sin and death had been accomplished. Jesus appearedto his disciples
and then returned to heaven 40 days later with the promise that he would
return againsomeday. Jesus'words and life show us how to live life, but his
messagewas that humanity should respond to God's love. Jesus claimedto be
much more than a wise man or greatteacher. He claimed to be God—a God
willing to die for his creationso that their love relationship could be restored
(Romans 5:10). Through his birth, life, death, and resurrection, Jesus fulfilled

the hundreds of prophecies in the Old Testamentthat foretold of a coming
Messiah, a Saviornot only for the nation of Israel, but for the whole world (1
Timothy 4:10). How will you respond to Jesus’life and love?
The point and the pinnacle of Eastercelebrationis the worship of Jesus
Christ, the one who declared, "Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I
am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive forever and ever! And I
hold the keys of death and Hades" (Revelation1:17-18).
Pray this week:
Jesus we thank you for dying on the cross andfacing rejectionfor our sins.
What did you learn from the explanation of the 8 biblical words that you
didn't know before? How canyou apply this new knowledge to your life,
especiallythis Easterseason? Talk to someone aboutit.
Jesus Christ A PerfectSacrifice!- Poemby Shaila Touchton
Jesus is the word of God, through him all things are made
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,
And the Word was God
The Word became flesh and dwelt among us
So that we could behold God's glory
He came to the world to love us and deliver us from all sins
God was revealedvisibly through Jesus Christ

He is holy, blameless, pure, setapart from sinners, exalted above the heavens
He redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us
He shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners
The sacrifice ofanimals could never take awayour sins
Jesus offeredthe perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world
Jesus receivedblasphemous false accusations from the world
He was denied, abandoned, mocked, was arrestedand bound.
He was rejectedby his own hometown and was askeddeceitful questions.
He was ridiculed by his own family members, he was blindfolded, beaten
Struck with blows, was arrested, wounded, bruised unaccompaniedby his
accusers
He was falsely charged, chastised, enduredstripes, oppressed, ledto the
slaughter
Cut off from the land of the living, he was abusedby the roman soldiers
He was scourged, put on a crown of thorns on his head, a reed in His right
hand
Struck Him on the head with the reed
The soldiers striped him and divided His garments, nailed on the cross
He bore his own cross and was crucified.
The chief priests with the scribes mockedand sneeredat him

Jesus paid a debt of sin that He did not owe
We oweda debt of sin that we could not pay
Jesus came to serve, to take awaythe sins of many people
He willingly paid the ultimate sacrifice for the sins of the world
Our sins had to be paid with Jesus blood
Without shedding of His blood there is no remission of sins
He took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows
He was wounded for our transgressions, crushedfor our iniquities
He died on the cross as our perfect, unblemished, unspotted substitute
Who did not suffer for his own sins, but for the sins of others
Like a lamb that is led to the slaughter
He is the perfect Lamb without spot and without blemish
He is The Lamb of God who took awaythe sins of the world
He made a peace betweenGodand man through His death.
To reconcile to Himself all things,
Whether things on earth or things in heaven
Through His blood shed on the cross
We have been made holy through his one perfect sacrifice
We are saved and redeemed by His blood
Our sins are forgiven and we are justified through His blood
We have eternallife, communion and fellowship with God

Through His blood
He who follows Him shall not walk in darkness,
But have the light of life
For He is the way, the truth, and the light
The resurrectionand the life
He is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever
He is the one who baptized with the Holy Spirit
Jesus is our advocate, our comforter
He is Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation
He sent us ANOTHER comforterwhich is Holy Spirit
Lord Jesus Christ is the comforting Holy Spirit
And we must not grieve the Holy Spirit of God
For we are sealedunto the day of redemption.
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form
But laid aside his mighty powerand glory,
Taking the disguise of a slave and becoming like men
God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit,
Seenof angels, preachedunto the Gentiles
Believedon in the world, receivedup into glory
He was manifested to take awayour sins

And in him there is no sin
For Jesus Christis in the Father and the Father in him
The Holy Spirit is the spirit of God which is the spirit of Jesus Christ
For Fatherand Jesus are One
And Salvationis found only in Jesus Christ.
Shaila Touchton
The Ultimate Sacrifice - Poemby Denis Martindale
Autoplay next video
When nations turn from peace to war,
Eachsoul must question why...
When Death itself is at the door,
To bring its long goodbye...
To think, that leaders lead us all,
To back them to the hilt.
It's then we see our heroes fall,
When eachof them is killed...
When little children shake their heads,
Disgustedat such things,
It's right to pray beside our beds,

Condemning what warbrings.
The need for guns and bullets grows
And even bombs are made -
Efficiently Man fights his foes
And in their graves they're laid...
Who knows the goodthey could have done,
If peace had been their lot,
Instead of wars that must be won,
When nations turn from God?
If only love lived in eachheart,
We'd share God's Paradise,
Instead of this, new conflicts start
And blood's our sacrifice...
For some, the costwas loss of health...
For some, it's wastedtime...
For some, the costwas death itself,
When they were in their prime.
Is this the wisestway to live,
With bombs and bullets, too?
Christ's sacrifice helps God forgive
The evil that men do...
Denis Martindale

The Sacrifice
by Lorna McKelvie
A crown of thorns..with bleeding stripes
The Lamb of God ..the sacrifice
Nailed to a cross..inagony
He knew this was His destiny..
He lived to die..so high a cost
To save a world..dying ... lost..
To build a bridge...from God to man..
Eachnail that pierced..partof His plan..
Eachsin upon His shoulders laid
With eachdrop of blood ..the debt was paid
From sinless, spotless...holy..pure
To vile offender..hanging there..
Silently He bore our shame...
His shatteredbody..scarredand maimed..
From heaven to earth..now on that tree..
A death so cruel..to setus free..
Left all alone to bear our sins..

No Father there to comfort Him..
As darkness spreadacross the sky..
It is finished was His cry..
His job was done..
He lived to die.
But the beginning.. not the end..
He died but lives ..risenagain.
Deathcouldn't keepHim in the grave...
The war is over..the debt is paid.
He broke the chains and setus free..
That day He won the victory.
Now in heaven He reigns on High
But He'll be back..a secondtime..
He's coming then to take us home..
In a blaze of glory all His own..
And there we'll worship at His feet..
When on that day we finally meet..
Our Savior..oursacrifice..
Our All in All..
Holy ..Holy ..to the Lamb..

Jesus was the greatest sacrifice

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Jesus was the greatest sacrifice

More from GLENN PEASE

Recently uploaded

Jesus was the greatest sacrifice