Question: How could Jesus have paid for the sins of those who will go to hell anyway?

The Berean Call Podcast

Question: Can you help me with this question: “If Jesus died for all and has legally purchased all through substitutionary atonement, then how can those people go to hell? That would be a ‘Double Jeopardy’ of the sins of those people being paid for twice.” This is my husband’s main question and I would really appreciate help with it based on Calvinism.

Response: The Bible says that God wants all to be saved: “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Pet 3:9). But the Bible also says that not all will be saved (Matt 7:21-23; Lk 13:22-27, etc). Nevertheless, the Bible also tells us that God is all powerful (Ps 147:5; Jer 32:17; Matt 19:26, etc).

Calvinism has its own explanation. They strive to make things add up. “If God is all powerful,” the reasoning goes, “and God wants all people to be saved, then all people will be saved. Since not all people will be saved, Christ must have died only for some; God must not want all to be saved.”

This is unbiblical according to the much-explained John 3:16 (what “world” means), and the blunt statement of 1 John 2:1-2: “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” But to some, it makes nice, theological sense. This is, however, putting one’s reason above God’s Word; believing what makes sense rather than believing all of what God has said.

As Dave Hunt wrote in Calvin’s Dilemma: God’s Sovereignty vs. Man’s Free Will (pp 9-10), “William L. Pettingill wrote, ‘God insists upon His sovereignty and also upon man’s responsibility. Believe both and preach both, leaving the task of ‘harmonizing’ with Him.’ In a similar vein, A. T. Pierson, although a leading Presbyterian, declared that both ‘the sovereign will of God and the freedom of man’ are taught in Scripture and that ‘if we cannot reconcile these two, it is because the subject is so infinitely lifted up above us. Man is free.... Thus the last great invitation in God’s Book is an appeal to the will.’

“Unfortunately, neither John Calvin nor many of his followers today have been willing to accept both sides of this biblical teaching. The result has been devastating in its consequences for the gospel: that man can only reject Christ; he cannot accept and believe in Him unless he is sovereignly regenerated by God. Calvinism refuses to accept what so many great evangelists have recognized is vital. Edgar Mullins expresses very well the essential balance that is missing:

“‘Free will in man is as fundamental a truth as any other in the gospel and must never be canceled in our doctrinal statements. Man would not be man without it and God never robs us of our true moral manhood in saving us.... The decree of salvation must be looked at as a whole to understand it. Some have looked at God’s choice alone and ignored the means and the necessary choice on man’s part.’”