Doing some research on how reformed preachers deal with John 3:16, I was really surprised at how few resources there are on the web giving any real balanced, serious and fair discussion of the subject of the extent of the atonement.
As long as I have been around reformed theology, I have been adverse- to say the least- to the idea of presenting the Gospel as in any way “limited.” This goes deeply into my understanding of Jesus, my opposition to transactionalism, and my suspicion that the result of some theological constructs is a complete reversal of the intention of Jesus. From the first time I read A.W. Pink turning John 3:16 into a text that meant Jesus didn’t love all the little children of the world, I’ve disliked the “L.”
I did find two resources I wanted to pass along. Dr. Ron Rhodes has an extensive essay at “Reasoning From The Scriptures” examining and critiquing the theology of “Limited Atonement.” Well worth your time and very complete. The Case For Unlimited Atonement.
UPDATE: Randy Alcorn, who isn’t a Biblical scholar, but is well respected in reformed circles, is also unconvinced by “Limited” views of the work of Christ. He writes about his views here, and gives special attention to several reformed teachers.
Dr. Bruce Ware, a professor at Southern Seminary, also rejects the “Limited” notion of the work of Jesus in his “four point” Calvinism. I discovered an excellent outline where Dr. Ware overviews all the major options on this subject, looks at Biblical passages for each one, summarizes the theological arguments, and advocates his “unlimited” position.
I am reproducing the entire outline here. I will have little to say on this, because debating these points is no longer my interest. But you are welcome to the comment threads if you want to discuss Ware and Rhodes.Continue reading “Rhodes, Alcorn and Ware on God’s Love and Christ’s Work”