“God commends His love to us in this, that we being yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being justified now by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath through Him” (Romans 5:8-9).
I think it was a self-righteous tolerant Calvinist who said that “evangelical Arminians believe that apart from Christ’s shed blood, there is no forgiveness.” The problem with that view is that Christ’s shed blood does not SECURE and DEMAND forgiveness for everyone for whom it was shed. Christ’s blood does not justify anyone. Of course it makes justification and forgiveness POSSIBLE, but since it was supposedly shed for those who end up in hell, it does not of itself justify anybody. It just makes it POSSIBLE for God to forgive on OTHER grounds. In this view, Christ’s blood is NOT the ground of salvation, since many end up in hell any way, despite His blood supposedly being shed for them. In this case, salvation is conditioned on the sinner, rather than the shed blood and imputed righteousness of Christ alone. In short, the Christ-hating, blood-despising Arminians say that apart from Christ’s shed blood, there is no forgiveness AND they also say that even with Christ’s blood there is STILL no forgiveness. For them, forgiveness is on other antichristian grounds (cf. 1 John 2:22, 4:3).
If the Arminian thinks that he does not boast since he says, “apart from God’s grace I couldn’t have been saved,” then I will remind him of the man Jesus talked about who said, “I thank thee O God, that I am not like other men…like this tax collector…” Remember, it was the other man went to his house justified who said, “God be merciful (literally, “propitiated”) to me, the sinner!”
The blood of Christ alone is what appeases the wrath of God. Those who think this blood has no POWER to save everyone for whom it was shed, evidenced by the belief that people go to hell in spite of the blood supposedly being shed on their behalf, MUST believe that something OTHER THAN (or blasphemously “mixed” with)THE BLOOD of Christ turns away the wrath of God.
What does it mean to be justified by the blood of Christ? If you believe that Christ shed His precious blood for those who end up in hell, then what do you believe justified you? If you answer, “the blood of Christ alone justified me,” then I would say: Since you believe Christ died for those in hell, then it was not the blood of Christ that justified you. It was your so-called “acceptance” of the blood of Christ that justified you. Why do I say, “so-called acceptance”? This is why:
“Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation through faith in His blood, as a demonstration of His righteousness through the passing over of the sins that had taken place before, in the forbearance of God, for a demonstration of His righteousness in the present time, for His being just and justifying the one that is of the faith of Jesus” (Romans 3:24-26).
To “accept” or have faith in His blood is to believe that God is truly propitiated and appeased by His blood. If you believe that Christ’s blood is shed for everyone without exception, then you do not believe that God is propitiated by it. You must believe that some action on your part–enabled by so-called grace–was what ultimately propitiated God. If you would object, think about this: If Christ’s blood truly propitiated God, as Romans 3:25 clearly states, then no one for whom His blood was shed would go to hell. If you truly had faith in His blood, then you would not believe that this blood was shed for those in hell, nor would you call “saved” those who believe this Christ dishonoring blasphemy.
If you believe that Christ shed His blood for those who end up in hell, or you believe that some who believe this are presently saved persons, then you do NOT have faith in Christ’s blood.