Bernard_Marx
Puritan Board Freshman
The other day I went to a local Christian bookstore to purchase "Debating Calvinism." The owner of the store asked me where I stand and I replied that I'm a five-pointer. He read me a paragraph from "The Mediation of Christ" by Thomas Torrence. This said essentially that because Christ was the 2nd Adam he had to have represented all men on the cross otherwise his mission was a failure, as Adam represented all men in the fall. I've never heard this before, but as I thought about it more this morning in the shower two thoughts came to mind:
1) When one considers this arguement in light of God's eternal decree it becomes somewhat mute. If it was God's plan to save some and not others for his glory from all eternity then this arguement becomes irrelevant (somehow I think people will jump on me for this one, but I don't know why).
2) I don't see the logical nessessity that all men must be atoned for simply because Jesus had a nature common to all people. This is logically disconnected.
Any help developing this? Any additional thoughts?
Grace+
TJRS
[Edited on 5-13-2004 by Richard B. Davis]
1) When one considers this arguement in light of God's eternal decree it becomes somewhat mute. If it was God's plan to save some and not others for his glory from all eternity then this arguement becomes irrelevant (somehow I think people will jump on me for this one, but I don't know why).
2) I don't see the logical nessessity that all men must be atoned for simply because Jesus had a nature common to all people. This is logically disconnected.
Any help developing this? Any additional thoughts?
Grace+
TJRS
[Edited on 5-13-2004 by Richard B. Davis]