As Baptist we hold dear to the truth that Christs death was subsitionary- that is that he actually died in the place of sinners and satisfied all the justice of God. Yet how can we reconcile this with the belief of many Bapitsts that that Christ's death was also universal in scope without effecting salvtion to every single person on earth? If we answer with "Sinners must accept Christ's payment of sins" then does not this condition of acceptance by nature make substitutionary attonment an immpossibility? In other words, shouldn't substitionary attonment be an impossibilty with a conditional attonment? If Christ died in the place of sinners and actually paid their penalty for their sins on the cross, why must sinners pay for that penalty again in hell? The only possible answer one could give to this question then is that Christ died not for the sins of certain individuals (substitionary attonment) but instead died for "sin" and faced the penalty that any sinner should face for their sin. If this were the case then it is not the death of Christ that saves but God saves the sinner on the basis of his desicion not for anything Christ did on the cross. This is not substitionary attonment, but conditional attonment- that is that upon the condtion of ones acceptance of Christ he is saved not by anything Christ actually did on the cross for him since Christ suffered equally for the person who accepts and the person who does not. But as Baptist we beleive the Bible teaches that Christ actually took the place of sinners on the cross (Rm. 5:8). But many Baptists really believe this? I submit that they do not (I am not trying to offend anyone here ok ). Instead they believe in conditional attonment as described above. To accept that Christ dided as an acutall substitute for sinners and paid for their sin on the cross to save them, demands what some would call particualar redemption.