“You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly.” (Rom. 5:6, NIV)
Note that the death of Christ is for the “ungodly.” Does Paul use the word “ungodly” here simply as a synonym for “the elect?” Or should “ungodly” be qualified to be referring to the “ungodly elect?” Is Paul really meaning to say “for the ungodly, that is, those who are the ungodly elect?” For the Calvinist, Paul must mean that because Christ dies only for the elect. But this Calvinist theology is incoherent with this text. It imposes upon the text something foreign to the whole context. The more natural interpretation here is that Christ dies for everyone because everyone fits into this category of “ungodly.” That was established in Romans 3:23.
The Calvinist confusion here is thinking of Christ’s death as being a “failure” or a “waste” if there are not particular persons for whom his death will apply. Christ could not have died for everyone, for if he had, everyone must then be saved lest Christ’s death be ineffective or to no avail in those who do not believe. Calvinists state that Christ’s death must be effective (efficacious). If Christ died to take the penalty of sin, then the penalty of sin must be forgiven. If Christ died for all, then the penalty for the sins of all is forgiven, and everyone will be saved. But not everyone is saved. So Christ’s death must accomplish the salvation of some individuals. Therefore, there must be an elect for whom his death must and will apply. If there are any that are not saved, and there surely are, Christ could not have died for them otherwise the work of Christ is somehow “wasted” or it “failed.”
But if this salvation is a “gift,” as Paul indicates in Rom. 5:15ff., and that gift is received by faith, and if Jesus’ death opened a way to the Father for all sinners, it does not follow to think of his death as a quantity that has a definite, limited “supply” of grace, but in terms of its quality and sufficiency in and of itself and its efficacy only in the context of a response of faith. If people remain in unbelief, it is through their own stubborn willfulness that they do so, and their sins also remain theirs, and judgment must follow (Jn. 3:14-18). As we will see in Rom. 5:8, Christ’s death is the demonstration of God’s love. Love risks rejection, but this is no less love, and there is no love lost. What “task” did Christ perform on the cross? Did he die to provide the way of salvation for all, or did he die to save only a chosen, limited number? From what Paul writes, I can only conclude the former. Jesus died for all. The concern over the “success” of Jesus’ ministry and sacrifice, that he may have died for nothing, or his work is somehow wasted on unbelievers, is foreign to the text. These ideas and concerns arise only because the Calvinist is presupposing the truth of his theological scheme of universal divine causal determinism when reading the text. The text does not support the idea of a one-to-one correspondence of Jesus’ death to a sinner. Jesus died for all, and their sins are forgiven when they believe. If they do not believe, they are rejecting Christ’s death on their behalf.
Go to the next section: Romans 5:8 and Issues of Assurance and “Manifest Evidences”
Chapter 14 – The Nature of Grace in Scripture
The Truth of the Gospel 