Without a doubt, one of the Reformed doctrines which evangelical and fundamentalist Christians find most scandalous is the doctrine of definite, personal or limited atonement.1 This rejection happens, in part, because the Reformed teaching is not always well understood. Sometimes the misunderstandings . . . Continue reading →
Martin has been posting great stuff on the atonement. Note the last bit he quotes. Pop quiz: To what covenant(s) does he refer when he calls Christ a “surety”?
At DeYoung, Restless, and Reformed.
“In rejecting the Arminian errors regarding the death of Christ, the authors of the Canons now turn to the weakest point in the so-called ‘universal atonement’ position. In the Arminian scheme of redemption, the death of Christ does not actually save any . . . Continue reading →