Logical conclusion of an unlimited atonement

[cih1355]

I came across a website that advocates that a belief in an unlimited atonement leads to the conclusion that salvation is conditioned on the sinner and if salvation is conditioned on the sinner, then there is something that the sinner contributes to his salvation. Hence, this would be a denial of salvation by God's grace alone. This website maintains that since an unlimited atonement leads to the conclusion that salvation is conditioned on the sinner, then all those who believe in an unlimited atonement believe in a false gospel. Here is a link to the website: http://www.outsidethecamp.org/

Do any of you have any comments?





[Edited on 4-7-2005 by cih1355]

 

[Arch2k]

Outside the Camp is a dangerous place to go. Marc Carpenter has run amok. He claims to believe in historic reformed theology, but in the same breath has condemned Calvin, Pink, Clark and others.

To address your question: Does one need to believe in Limited Atonement to be saved? No. Can one believe in Unlimited atonement and be saved? Yes. Martin Luther believed in unlimted atonement, but his gospel was not works/merit based. Many believe in unlimited atonement because it is the only logical outworking of their works/merit based faith. In this case, it is altogether heretical.

I would recommend reading Matt's article on Arminianism here

Here is a quote:

But for the most part, each "Arminian" must be dealt with individually in order to assess their understanding, or flavor, of theological soup. It may very well be that they are believing a damning heresy. It may very well be that they are simply confused and need help to understand the doctrines of God's grace, or their depravity. But in any case, the Calvinist ought always to be fair, gentle and loving in his approach to preaching the grace of God in Jesus Christ.

 

[Puritan Sailor]

The problem with the logic advocated there, is that they don't take into account the inconsistency and remaining sinfulness of man. Man is full of contradictions. He may put sole trust in Christ and yet due to misunderstanding defend free will. But ask him if he believes salvation by works and he will flat out deny it. That is the blessed hope we have for arminians, or any folks in erroneous churches. God works in spite of their inconsistency.

 

[Poimen]

Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
Outside the Camp is a dangerous place to go. Marc Carpenter has run amok. He claims to believe in historic reformed theology, but in the same breath has condemned Calvin, Pink, Clark and others.

To address your question: Does one need to believe in Limited Atonement to be saved? No. Can one believe in Unlimited atonement and be saved? Yes. Martin Luther believed in unlimted atonement, but his gospel was not works/merit based. Many believe in unlimited atonement because it is the only logical outworking of their works/merit based faith. In this case, it is altogether heretical.

I would recommend reading Matt's article on Arminianism here

Here is a quote:

But for the most part, each "Arminian" must be dealt with individually in order to assess their understanding, or flavor, of theological soup. It may very well be that they are believing a damning heresy. It may very well be that they are simply confused and need help to understand the doctrines of God's grace, or their depravity. But in any case, the Calvinist ought always to be fair, gentle and loving in his approach to preaching the grace of God in Jesus Christ.

Thank you Jeff & Matt. Well put.

As much as I am a defender of a definite atonement, not believing in it does not make someone a reprobate.

[Edited on 4-8-2005 by poimen]

 

[Me Died Blue]

Believing in one of the logical conclusions of the contrary, though...now that's another story!