Sufficiency for all, efficient for some?

Discussion in 'Calvinism & The Doctrines of Grace' started by benbooth11, Nov 15, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. timfost

    timfost Puritan Board Senior


    Yes, I agree. Though I'm a strong advocate for the sufficient/efficient distinction, I'm not overly concerned when Reformed people disagree.

    Too often this distinction is labeled Amyraldianism. Our confessions either a) don't affirm or reject it (Westminster Standards) or b) positively affirm it (Heidelberg and Dort).

    I think if the Reformed more readily affirmed the distinction, Tulip's "L" might be more accessible to those who have reservations, since scripture uses universal language and does not contain explicit language that Christ did not for some.

    I understand this is not acceptable to many on this board, but regardless, it has a confessional precedent that should not be ignored.
  2. Ask Mr. Religion

    Ask Mr. Religion Flatly Unflappable

    Moderator Note:
    Thread closed while staff discusses things.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page