My Photo

May 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

Become a Fan

Photo Albums

« Looking at "Unconditional Election" | Main | Irresistible Grace »

31 August 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Dustin

"Although there are variations as to the basic ways in which this subject can be addressed, the choices boil down to two: the death of Jesus was intended to secure salvation either for a limited number or for everyone"

Exactly, but if you believe it was sufficient for everyone, doesn't mean everyone is saved. That's the difference. therefore, it doesn't make you a universalist. that's just classical arminian thought.

Stephen Grant

Dustin, I was aghast at the use of wikipidia as a source So I went to the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. It states: "Although there are variations as to the basic ways in which this subject can be addressed, the choices boil down to two: the death of Jesus was intended to secure salvation either for a limited number or for everyone." (from Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Copyright © 1984 by Baker Books. All rights reserved. Used by permission.)

The real question is was the atonement efficacious (or did it accomplish the purposes that God had in mind for it). If one states that it was efficacious and it accomplished it's goals, and they also believe that not all are saved they must accept a "limited atonement", if one does not accept that it was efficacious and not effective than one might accept the idea of "universal atonement" that "didn't work" the way it was supposed to.

Dustin

"If you aren't a universalist, you believe in limited atonement."

that's not true. Arminians believe in unlimited atonement and they're not universalists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlimited_atonement

The comments to this entry are closed.