Mr. Andy Underhile: Christ, Limited Atonement, & Un-Reformed Anglicans

Mr. Andy Underhile at: http://andycontramundum.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-christ-limits-atonement-1.html   

How Christ Limits the Atonement #1

When considering the question of the extent of the atonement, it is important to state that most theories regarding it are quite out of bounds because they fail to see that the extent is defined by its nature.(Which is why we refuted objections to the doctrine of the atonement, thus defining its nature, before we took on this topic.) So the real question is regarding the nature of the atonement. The nature circumscribes its extent. It extends as far as its nature intends it to extend. Discussions on this subject are almost always carried on as if the extent of the atonement can be decided without reference to the nature of the atonement. But when we ponder the issue of the extent of the atonement, in other words, for whom did Christ die, by  Christ's own words, if they carry any weight with us at all, the verdict is quite decisive. Christ uses several expressions in speaking of whom His death is efficacious for and for whom are its effects. Let us adduce five of them here and comment briefly on each.

First, he calls them the many (Matthew 26:28; 20:28). If we study across the scope of Jesus' teaching, we will find that this expression, the many, is used by Him exclusively to refer to those who are His own, a people given to Him. The word many would not be enough to prove the limited extent of the atonement were it not also for the fact that they are described by marks which cannot be applied universally.

In the 17^th century, a dangerous theory was contrived (a fan favorite of the Arminians), which held that when Christ was said to have died for all, this was referring to what had been done to procure redemption, and when He was said to have died for many, or for the Church, it was describing the actual participation of redemption. That this theory is not only false, but also dangerous, can be seen by the fact that our Lord describes the actual offering of the ransom and not just its application.

 

For the rest, see:

 

http://andycontramundum.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-christ-limits-atonement-1.html

 

Parts 2-4 can be found here:

http://andycontramundum.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-christ-limits-atonement-2.html

http://andycontramundum.blogspot.com/2012/02/how-christ-limits-atonement-3.html

http://andycontramundum.blogspot.com/2012/02/how-christ-limits-atonement-4.html

We would add the following:

A fresh reminder, thanks. Sometimes, being old school and somewhat-schooled, one may be inclined to "just forget." These views were accepted, once upon a time, by the Archbishop of Canterbury. As well as the English commissioners to the Synod of Dordt. But, the "Anti-Calvinist" (and Willy Laud hated Calvin) faction stirred much hate and discontent. 

Thanks again for the reminder, but this will go over the heads of the Anglicanobaptacostals as "adiaphora." The Tractarians will just simply pout and object; they are Romanists without the Pope. They are Un-Reformed an Un-Reformable Anglicans.