Comments on: Hebrews 10:3 http://www.shortthoughts.com/2007/07/19/devotions/hebrews-10-3/ Blog | Devotions | Booklog | Articles Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:54:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Jeff Short http://www.shortthoughts.com/2007/07/19/devotions/hebrews-10-3/#comment-7 Jeff Short Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:28:45 +0000 http://www.shortthoughts.com/2007/07/19/devotions/hebrews/hebrews-10-3/#comment-7 <p>I believe the atonement was sufficient and efficient for all those for whom Christ died (or, limited atonement). So, the number of people that Christ died to save are saved. That number is fixed from before the foundation of the world and neither increases nor diminishes. The number of the elect being fixed, so is the number of their multitudinous sins fixed. In this vein, asking if Christ would have to shed another drop of blood for <i>one more sin</i> is kind of like asking if He would have to suffer more if the elect + 1 were saved. </p> <p>Now, what we might call the value of the atonement is, I believe, infinite. And, therefore I do not believe Christ could have suffered anymore than He did. But, the point is that He did die for particular <i>sins</i>. This is demonstrated in the law and its prescriptions for various sins and the law was 'eye for eye' etc. Christ took our curse, the curse of the law, which demands that "every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward," which He bore in His own body on the tree. </p> <p>Also, in this post, being a brief devotional on this passage, I hoped to turn our thoughts to the perfect sacrifice of Christ as saving us from our sins. I think I have answered your question, if not, just clarify.</p> I believe the atonement was sufficient and efficient for all those for whom Christ died (or, limited atonement). So, the number of people that Christ died to save are saved. That number is fixed from before the foundation of the world and neither increases nor diminishes. The number of the elect being fixed, so is the number of their multitudinous sins fixed. In this vein, asking if Christ would have to shed another drop of blood for one more sin is kind of like asking if He would have to suffer more if the elect + 1 were saved.

Now, what we might call the value of the atonement is, I believe, infinite. And, therefore I do not believe Christ could have suffered anymore than He did. But, the point is that He did die for particular sins. This is demonstrated in the law and its prescriptions for various sins and the law was ‘eye for eye’ etc. Christ took our curse, the curse of the law, which demands that “every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward,” which He bore in His own body on the tree.

Also, in this post, being a brief devotional on this passage, I hoped to turn our thoughts to the perfect sacrifice of Christ as saving us from our sins. I think I have answered your question, if not, just clarify.

]]> By: mattb http://www.shortthoughts.com/2007/07/19/devotions/hebrews-10-3/#comment-6 mattb Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:20:28 +0000 http://www.shortthoughts.com/2007/07/19/devotions/hebrews/hebrews-10-3/#comment-6 You wrote: <i>I believe that He bore all of my “sins in His own body on the tree.” If I had one sin that Christ did not die for, I would be eternally lost. “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all” (Ja 2:10). He suffered the punishment for all those actual and particular sins.</i> Do you believe that Christ's suffering was intense enough to pay only for the specific sins for which He died? In other words, if I had sinned one more sin, would Christ have had to suffer just a little more? Shed maybe one more drop of blood? Or, is sin itself an infinite crime that requires an infinite payment, so that regardless of the quantity of sins for which Christ died, the infinite payment He made would have sufficed? You wrote:
I believe that He bore all of my “sins in His own body on the tree.” If I had one sin that Christ did not die for, I would be eternally lost. “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all” (Ja 2:10). He suffered the punishment for all those actual and particular sins.

Do you believe that Christ’s suffering was intense enough to pay only for the specific sins for which He died? In other words, if I had sinned one more sin, would Christ have had to suffer just a little more? Shed maybe one more drop of blood? Or, is sin itself an infinite crime that requires an infinite payment, so that regardless of the quantity of sins for which Christ died, the infinite payment He made would have sufficed?

]]>