This morning I logged into Facebook and was intrigued by Seth McBee’s status that he is frustrated with J. I. Packer’s view of the atonement. I just had to track this down on his blog and discovered that he was complaining about Packer’s exaltation of Puritan John Owen’s definitive work on Limited Atonement, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ. Seth didn’t appreciate Packer’s characterization of those who deny Limited Atonement as believing in a “self-esteem gospel.” This gave me an opportunity to explain some of the logic of Reformed theology in relation to God-centeredness versus Man-centeredness in the comments thread at his website devoted to his book reviews, Contend Earnestly Books. Some of you may enjoy receiving an introduction to the logic of Limited Atonement, and others of you may enjoy assissting me in contending earnestly for Limited Atonement. All are invited. Read my comments here.
Our discussion has moved from Contend Earnestly Books to his post to his duplicate post at Contend Earnestly. The post is entitled, “J. I. Packer’s View on the Atonement.” Seth is going to attempt to fill in the “holes” in my argument. Let’s see what we all learn together, as a couple of “irons” commence to “sharpening” each other. Be sure to enter the fray with your two cents worth.
I also want to remind everyone that I do not deny limited atonement, I embrace it, but I also embrace unlimited…it is both, not either or.
So, I believe that Jesus Christ died for all men, especially the elect of God.
Come on over…it will be a good discussion
I posted a series of questions over at Seth’s and by it arrive at my own conclusion for my basis of understanding who the Elect are and who the reprobate are and why they are reprobate.
I highly value your sword. Please apply it to mine. I want to be sharp!