Credo?

I was on a friend's blog today where he is doing single paragraph credo's (i believe.) I was reading them one by one, when his entry on July 15th caught my eye, "Credo-on Limited Atonement."

Heres an excerpt of his blog

"Instead of limited atonement,
some have re-labeled it as a definite atonement-
that is that Jesus died for a specific group of people.
These Calvinists point to the elect
as that “definite" group in favor of limiting the atonement.
On this one, I part company with historical Calvinists
and plead for 1 John2 where John writes that
Jesus did not only die for our sins but for the sins of
'the whole world'."

I have two comments to make about the above statement.

1. Definite atonement is a better word, for Christ died for his elect in a very definite way. He went to the cross for his bride, he was crushed by God the Father for their sins. Christ went to the cross to die for his elect. It was their sins that he paid for. Isaiah 53:11 states that Christ, 'will make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities'. Note it is the people whose iniquities are bore that are accounted as righteous. If Christ died for 'the whole world' in the same way, then all would have their sins bore by Christ and hence accounted righteous. Which the Bible clearly teaches otherwise.

2. Calvinists only use the phrase "Limited atonement" because if fits with the TULIP acronym.
Most of the opponents to Reformed Theology try to say that Calvinists limit what Christ did on the cross. We proclaim that Christ really saved sinners, that his work on the cross secured his elect. His sacrifice didn't just make it possible for people to come to him (hence guarantees nobody's salvation), but it made it certain that those he died for... would come.