Was the atonement wasted if God chooses who to save?
Posted on Wednesday, March 6, 2013 under pontifications • 1 comment • read it ⇒A response to the common intuition that, under Calvinism, Jesus’s suffering was wasted for all those who God did not choose to save.
On the atonement, part 6: universal atonement fails to actually accomplish redemption for anyone
Posted on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 under papers • 12 comments • read it ⇒In this series, I forward a considered case for a universal atonement, presenting what I find to be the most compelling arguments for it, defining what exactly it entails, and interacting with the most common and persuasive objections against it.
This is part 6 of 6, in which I consider and confute the objection that a universal atonement would not actually secure or guarantee salvation for anyone.
On the atonement, part 5: universal salvation, or double payment
Posted on Monday, March 30, 2009 under papers • 3 comments • read it ⇒In this series, I forward a considered case for a universal atonement, presenting what I find to be the most compelling arguments for it, defining what exactly it entails, and interacting with the most common and persuasive objections against it.
This is part 5 of 6, in which I refute the objection that universal atonement entails either universal salvation, or a double payment for sins.
On the atonement, part 4: God’s desires frustrated?
Posted on Thursday, January 15, 2009 under papers • 6 comments • read it ⇒In this series, I forward a considered case for a universal atonement, presenting what I find to be the most compelling arguments for it, defining what exactly it entails, and interacting with the most common and persuasive objections against it.
This is part 4 of 6, in which I interact with the objection that universal atonement requires that God be at cross-purposes with himself, entertaining frustrated desires which he cannot fulfill.
On the atonement, part 3: the objective grounds for faith
Posted on Thursday, January 8, 2009 under papers • 4 comments • read it ⇒In this series, I forward a considered case for a universal atonement, presenting what I find to be the most compelling arguments for it, defining what exactly it entails, and interacting with the most common and persuasive objections against it.
This is part 3 of 6, in which I forward the argument that particular atonement provides no grounds for faith, and makes the assurance of salvation impossible.
On the atonement, part 2: the grounds for the universal gospel call
Posted on Tuesday, December 30, 2008 under papers • 19 comments • read it ⇒In this series, I forward a considered case for a universal atonement, presenting what I find to be the most compelling arguments for it, defining what exactly it entails, and interacting with the most common and persuasive objections against it.
This is part 2 of 6, in which I forward the argument that particular atonement is inconsistent with the universal gospel call, whether it is conceived of as an invitation, or as a command only.
On the atonement, part 1: federal headship and forensic imputation
Posted on Wednesday, December 17, 2008 under papers • 30 comments • read it ⇒In this series, I forward a considered case for a universal atonement, presenting what I find to be the most compelling arguments for it, defining what exactly it entails, and interacting with the most common and persuasive objections against it.
This is part 1 of 6, in which I forward the argument that particular atonement is inconsistent with what is revealed in Scripture about federal headship and forensic imputation: two doctrines central to Christ’s penal substitution.