In studying the Reformed doctrine of limited (or particular) atonement, I turned to
A Theology for the Church
, ed. Daniel L. Akin (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2007) in order to see how my Baptist brothers dealt with this doctrine. Dr. Paige Patterson, who articulates an Amyraldian view of the atonement in his chapter "The Work of Christ," critiques the Reformed doctrine of limited atonement by simply stating,
"The idea of an atonement limited only to the elect is a concept that belongs to a logical system" (585-6).
In presenting John Owen's exegetical view of the doctrine of limited atonement, Carl R. Trueman responds to charges such as this. He writes,
It is important to make this point at the start, because there are many who see limited atonement as a mere logical deduction from the doctrine of election and reprobation. That is far too simplistic a way of looking at it, because there is considerable exegesis underlying the notion of limited atonement and a great deal of sophisticated reflection upon the connections between Old Testament and New Testament in the development of the concept. Thus, to disagree with limited atonement you must disagree with the exegesis that underlies it and reject the understanding of the relationship between Old Testament types and New Testament antitypes. You should not dismiss limited atonement as a naïve, overly logical deduction from [the] doctrine of election, because that simply is not the case." [Carl R. Trueman. "Post-Reformation Developments in the Doctrine of the Atonement," in Precious Blood: The Atoning Work of Christ
, ed. Richard D. Phillips (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 2009), 197-8.]
Three classic studies on the atonement which include detailed exegetical work on the subject of the extent of the atonement are:
- John Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied
. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955 [reprinted in 1984]. 
- Leon Morris, The Atonement
. Downer's Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1983.
- John Owen, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ
. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1983.
Limited Atonement: A Mere Logical Deduction?
Jason, I think Patterson claims to be a 3-point Calvinist, not an Amyraldian (4-point). FWIW.
ReplyDeleteI just listened to a lecture from one of the profs at Patterson's school, Southwestern. The prof is David Allen and he spoke on the topic "Was the Writer of Hebrews a Calvinist?". This was in about 2007 or 2008, I am sure you could find it on the Southwestern site.
He would give the other side of the story at any rate.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
I see your point about not being a 4-pointer. I really wonder if he is not a 2-pointer (only T and P). He appears to have issues with U, L, and I. In his chapter he appears to favor and defend the Amyraldian view of a hypothetical universal atonement.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate you pointing this out. I'll do a bit more research. I'm trying to improve my grasp of this doctrine.