Why did Christ die?

Under the "big tent" of Evangelicalism there are two opposing views concerning the intention and purpose for why Christ died. One view says that Jesus died to make salvation possible. This is actually the most common and popular understanding among Christians today. The idea goes something like this: "Jesus came into the world to provide salvation by His death and make it possible for anyone who would choose to be saved." The vast majority of preachers on any given Sunday will proclaim this concept as gospel truth.

The second and opposing view regarding the intention of Christ's death declares that Jesus died to secure salvation for all those He came to save. In other words, Jesus did not make salvation a mere possibility, but actually accomplished salvation by His death on the cross. His death purchased a real salvation for a particular people in whose place He died as their substitute.

Now concerning these two very different views of the purpose and intention of Christ's death, we have to ask: which is biblical? The first view is certainly attractive, and that for two reasons: on the one hand, it seems "fair" because it maintains that Jesus died for everyone without exception; while on the other hand, it leaves man as the decision maker for his own salvation. Thus Jesus is held up as a "potential" Savior for someone who might choose to accept what He did on the cross as a worthy provision for salvation.

But is this the way the Bible portrays Jesus Christ? Are we to believe that God would have His Son pay for the salvation of everyone if He knew that Christ would not be able to obtain what He paid for? Was the death of Christ just a gamble God took in the hope that someone somewhere in time would accept what Jesus did and be saved? Or are we to assume that Jesus is sitting in heaven wringing His hands with worry over whether or not His death will bring salvation to some poor sinner? Of course the answer to these questions is a resounding "no"! Let me also add "never". Quite frankly, despite how popular the first view may be it slanders God and makes a mockery of what Christ came to do. Hence it is not biblical.

The second view, though not as widely accepted, treats the purpose and intention of Christ's death with honesty and seriousness. In other words, it holds up the biblical view. The reason why Jesus was sent into the world was to save all those His Father gave Him to save (see Jn.6:37,39; 10:27,28; 17:2,6,9,12). His death therefore was an actual price for an actual people He intended to redeem.

For this reason when the Bible describes what Christ did on the cross, it speaks of what His death accomplished. For instance, His death accomplished "propitiation" (Rom.3:25), "redemption" (Eph.1:7), "justification" (Rom.5:9), and "reconciliation" (Rom.5:10). Each of these terms describe the death of Christ as a curse-bearing, wrath-removing, ransom-paying sacrifice which Jesus procured and effected only for those His Father gave Him to save.

And who exactly are these people the Father gave to His Son to redeem? The Bible is very explicit: they are "His people" (Matt.1:21), "His sheep" (Jn.10:11-13), "the children of God" (Jn.11:51-52), "believers" (Jn.3:16), "the church" (Eph.5:25), "His seed" (Isa.53:10) and "the elect" (Rom.8:32,33). Therefore Jesus did not die to make salvation possible for everyone. But rather, His death guaranteed salvation only for His people. Henceforth, when we proclaim the gospel, we do not proclaim a "potential" Savior but a Savior who really saves. "And you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins" (Matt.1:21).