Fee Download Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic
It can be one of your morning readings Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic This is a soft documents publication that can be got by downloading and install from online publication. As known, in this innovative era, modern technology will certainly reduce you in doing some activities. Even it is merely reviewing the visibility of book soft documents of Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic can be additional attribute to open. It is not just to open up and also conserve in the gadget. This time in the morning as well as various other leisure time are to check out guide Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic
Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic
Fee Download Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic
Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic Actually, publication is actually a window to the globe. Also lots of people could not appreciate checking out publications; guides will certainly constantly give the precise details concerning reality, fiction, experience, journey, politic, faith, as well as much more. We are below a website that provides compilations of books greater than the book store. Why? We offer you great deals of varieties of link to obtain the book Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic On is as you need this Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic You could discover this publication quickly here.
Reviewing book Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic, nowadays, will not force you to always acquire in the establishment off-line. There is an excellent area to purchase the book Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic by on-line. This site is the most effective website with great deals numbers of book collections. As this Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic will certainly remain in this book, all books that you need will certainly be right here, also. Just search for the name or title of guide Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic You can discover exactly what you are searching for.
So, also you require responsibility from the company, you could not be confused any more because books Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic will certainly always assist you. If this Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic is your finest companion today to cover your work or job, you can when feasible get this publication. Just how? As we have actually informed recently, merely see the web link that our company offer below. The final thought is not just guide Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic that you hunt for; it is how you will obtain many publications to assist your ability and capability to have piece de resistance.
We will certainly show you the very best and also most convenient way to obtain book Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic in this world. Lots of collections that will support your responsibility will certainly be right here. It will certainly make you feel so perfect to be part of this site. Coming to be the member to constantly see what up-to-date from this book Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic site will make you really feel best to search for guides. So, just now, as well as below, get this Perspectives On The Extent Of The Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic to download and also save it for your precious worthwhile.
Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement presents a point-counterpoint exchange concerning God’s intention in sending Christ to die on the cross. All three contributors recognize a substitutionary element in the atoning work of Christ, but disagree over the nature and objects of that substitution.
Carl Trueman (Westminster Theological Seminary) argues that Christ’s atoning work secured the redemption of his elect alone. While infinite in value, Christ’s death was intended for and applied strictly to those whom the Father had elected unconditionally in eternity past.
John Hammett (Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary) argues that Christ’s atoning work had multiple intentions. Of these intentions two rise to the fore: (1) the intention to accomplish atonement for God’s elect and (2) the intention to provide atonement for all mankind.
Grant Osborne (Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) argues that Christ’s atoning work provided atonement generally for all mankind. The application of that atoning work is conditioned, however, on each person’s willingness to receive it.
- Sales Rank: #1028681 in Books
- Published on: 2015-02-01
- Original language: English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: 8.50" h x .51" w x 5.48" l, .0 pounds
- Binding: Paperback
- 256 pages
Review
“At one theological institution where I studied, we spoke of a certain style of debate: thesis, followed by antithesis, followed by personal abuse. This book does not adopt that style. The first obligation in serious theological polemics must be understanding both your own position and your opponents’ positions as thoroughly as possible, the more so if the topic is sensitive. That is the first strength of this book. The second is that it shows how, in debates over the extent (or intent!) of the atonement, the principal options are not two, but three, and how this third position, often connected with Amyraut, turns on the difficult notion of God having more than one will. In one sense this book breaks no new ground; it does not intend to. But I know no book that handles this subject with more scrupulous attention to fairness and accuracy in debate.”
D. A. Carson
Research Professor of New Testament, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School; President, The Gospel Coalition
About the Author
Andrew David Naselli is assistant professor of New Testament and Biblical Theology at Bethlehem College and Seminary, research manager for D. A. Carson, and administrator of Themelios.
Mark A. Snoeberger is associate professor of Systematic Theology at Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary.
Most helpful customer reviews
20 of 21 people found the following review helpful.
important book on this topic even if you hold unswervingly to one of the views
By Jennifer Guo
I don't usually gravitate toward multiview books, but what solidified Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement in my mind as a book I needed to read was a comment made in passing by a friend about how he always likes to engage with the best arguments of opposing positions. I have been a convinced 5-point Calvinist for a long time, and I've read many of the significant tomes defending Reformed soteriology (e.g From Heaven He Came and Sought Her, Salvation by Grace, etc.); but I couldn't remember ever reading a good academic defense of Arminian soteriology. Because this issue is one of the most controversial intra-Evangelical theological debates and one in which both sides are prone to caricature the other, at the very least Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement helps us see that each of the three views espoused in this book is exegetically and theologically tenable and that this is an in-house, family debate amongst genuine believers who all affirm the essential tenet of penal substitutionary atonement.
DEFINITE ATONEMENT
Carl Trueman kicks things off with a presentation and defense of definite atonement. He begins with the assertion that "the case for particular redemption, like that for the Trinity, does not depend on the understanding of any single text, nor does any single text explicitly teach it. Instead, it is the result of the cumulative force and implications of a series of strands of biblical teaching" (23). He then mounts his case by first arguing for the particularity of intention in Christ's saving mission and then contending for the objective efficacy of Christ's work. Trueman then sets these against the backdrop of the general biblical teaching of intention, efficacy, and atonement as seen in OT typology/prophecy and their NT fulfilment in the work of Christ. Finally, he addresses the common practical objection that espousing definite atonement harms preaching. Especially important is his demonstration that unless one ascribes to universal salvation, all attenuate the love of God in some sense and every system has problems. While Trueman offered many biblical texts in support of definite atonement, he contends that a more constructive approach than the typical proof-texting is "to understand the atonement within the biblical context of the objective efficacy of Christ's work as mediator" (40).
Tom McCall (though Grant Osborne wrote the essay on the Arminian view, due to health reasons he passed on the baton to McCall to respond to the other views) responds by first taking issue with several aspects of Trueman's methodology. He notes that Trueman's reference to his definite atonement view as anti-Pelagian is potentially misleading and argues against the validity of Trueman's comparison of definite atonement with the doctrine of the Trinity. In regards to specific texts, many of McCall's responses contend that Trueman makes the texts say more than they actually do. McCall also notes that perhaps Trueman does not understand the "free will defense." In response to the texts used by Trueman to argue for particularity in the intent of the atonement, Hammett (multiple intentions view) notes how advocates of universal atonement have always responded - "the texts do not say only his people, or sheep, or church" (75). Most of Hammett's responses are cursory and hint at points he will develop in his own essay, and the concluding remarks of his response summarize his multiple intentions position: "My concern in differentiating my view from definite atonement is not doing more justice to the love of God or providing a sound foundation for preaching. It is doing justice to the texts that seem to point to a universal intention alongside the particular intention. I think both are taught and can be seen as complementary, rather than contradictory" (79).
GENERAL ATONEMENT
In Chapter 2 Grant Osborne presents the general atonement view, arguing that “Christ has died sufficiently for all but efficiently for those who find faith in his atoning death” and that this does not entail universalism (81-82). He also claims that most Arminian theologians accept the doctrine of total depravity and that Arminianism is not semi-Pelagian. I think these two claims need careful definition and defense because many Reformed theologians would disagree. What strikes me as odd about this chapter is that Osborne spends about as much time presenting texts that seem to indicate a particular, efficacious atonement (without really arguing against them) as he does on texts that seem to favor a universal atonement. Osborne spends more time explaining definite atonement and quoting scholars who argue for this position than he does refuting it and citing Arminian scholars defending a general atonement. In a multiview book there is no need to "waste" a lot of pages explaining another position, especially when that essay is before yours. I think Osborne's case would have been much stronger if he had spent more time making a positive case for general atonement.
When he does get to the defense, Osborne focuses on 2 Peter 3:9 and John 1:4, 7, 9 and then flies over around twenty other texts in defense of a general atonement. Again, because of the extremely brief, surface-level treatment of a whole host of texts, the case isn't very strong. Osborne's main points from these texts are that 1) universal atonement is the result of God's love; 2) many for whom Christ died will perish; 3) the gospel must be universally proclaimed; and 4) sinners are presented as unbelievers whose rejection has brought about their damnation. He ends his chapter with an important argument: that a view of universal atonement does not lead to pelagianism or universalism and that Arminianism is not semi-Pelagian because of the doctrine of prevenient grace.
Trueman begins his response by asserting that this discussion can't be advanced by exchange of prooftexts nor isolated exegesis of texts, but is in actuality a theological matter as much as an exegetical one. He addresses this hermeneutical issue of isolated text versus theological framework in Osborne's exegesis. Trueman also addresses Osborne's claim that Arminians believe in total depravity and that the Arminian faith-response is not a work. He also devotes a considerable amount of space to Osborne's problematic treatment of the heavenly intercession of Christ. Trueman's main issue with Osborne's essay is that he did not address “the wider hermeneutical issues relative to soteriology as a whole. Thus, verses are represented as ambiguous or potentially serving either Calvinist or Arminian purposes without the development of the framework necessary to decide which interpretation is most valid. Further, the theological and pastoral implications of the whole Arminian scheme for the intercession of Christ, particularly as they serve to divest John 17 of its meaning, are devastating both to Catholic Christology and to pastoral application” (133-134). Hammett takes issue with Osborne's statement that some hyper-Calvinists interpret “all” as all kinds of people, not every person. He rightly notes this is a mainstream view among contemporary advocates of definite atonement. Hammett also demonstrates how out of Osborne's four main points for general atonement (numbered above), only the first two are legitimate arguments to deal with because the latter two pose no problem for proponents of definite atonement.
MULTIPLE INTENTIONS
Finally, John Hammett's essay argues "that there are three intentions in the atonement: universal, particular, and cosmic. It affirms that the atonement is in some sense universal and in some sense particular, but multiple-intentions best comprehends all of the biblical teaching on the atonement, particularly biblical teaching on the extent of the atonement” (149 emphasis original). The first part of the essay makes a case for a universal intention in the atonement, using many of the same texts and arguments as typical advocates of general atonement. The main difference here is that Hammett believes that the multiple intentions view can respond better to objections from the definite atonement camp than typical formulations of universal atonement. In the second part of his essay, Hammett makes a case for a particular intention in the atonement, again using many of the arguments typically made by the definite atonement camp but with some modifications and noting that the multiple intentions view is not subject to most objections to definite atonement. “By far the most important advantage [of the multiple intentions view] is that it allows for the most natural exegesis both to universal and to particular texts. It also allows for a clear and unmistakable basis for calling all to repentance and faith and for affirming that Christ has secured the salvation of the elect in his atonement. In short, the multiple-intentions view seems to have all the virtues of both traditional positions with few of the problems of either” (183).
In essence McCall agrees with much of what Hammet writes about universal intentionality but is “not entirely sure about how to square what he says about this with what he says about the 'particular intention'” (195). He's also not convinced that Hammet's view enjoys the dual advantage of accounting for both the full scope of God's love and particular intention in atonement. Notably, McCall also responds briefly to Hammett's objections about prevenient grace. Trueman, while acknowledging that "definite atonement" is a better designation than "limited atonement", argues that effective atonement is better yet. "This is the key to the issue of the matter, whether one regards the atonement as actually achieving anything or simply making something possible" (204). Trueman's critique of Hammett has mainly to do with his theological framework and the failure to set Christ's death within the context of His mediatory role (similar to his critique of Osborne). Furthermore, "one of the real weaknesses of Hammett's essay is his failure to set the New Testament death of Christ firmly within the context of the Old Testament. In doing so he both misses the larger redemptive-historical context of Christ's work and also the critical connection between sacrifice and application" (206). Trueman's main concern with hypothetical universalism is that "it fails to give a coherent account of the biblical teaching on priesthood and sacrifice, as it flows from Old Testament to New and find sits most elaborate expressions in John 17 and the Christology of the book of Hebrews" (211).
CONCLUSION
As I mentioned in the introduction to this review, at the very least Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement helps us see that each of the three views espoused in this book is exegetically and theologically tenable and that this is an in-house, family debate amongst genuine believers who all affirm the essential tenet of penal substitutionary atonement. This is very important because of the unfortunate tendency toward caricature and schism due to differing views on the extent of the atonement. Of course this is a great book to read for anyone who hasn't come to a definitive position on this matter yet. But this is also a very important book for those who hold passionately to their view and haven't grappled with the best arguments of the other side. As Andrew Naselli notes in the conclusion, he and his coeditor Mark Snoeberger's major goal for this book "is to help Christians better understand this issue and consequently disagree with their brothers and sisters in Christ in a God-glorifying way who hold different views. We want this book to help correct misperceptions and foster a better understanding of the extent of the atonement" (214). The book ends with 10 ways to create unhealthy schism over the extent of the atonement, which we obviously should avoid (pp. 217-227):
1.Uncharitably denigrating other positions.
2.Setting up and tearing down straw men.
3.Viewing other evangelical views as heresy.
4.Insufficiently defining a personal position.
5.Claiming that a personal view is the result of exegesis and biblical theology but not systematic theology.
6.Overemphasizing the importance of the atonement's extent.
7.Assuming that only non-Calvinists can tell a non-Christian "God loves you" or "Jesus died for you."
8.Requiring that others adhere to a particular view when flexibility is appropriate.
9.Giving the impression that complete understanding is possible regarding the extent of the atonement.
10.Holding a personal position with sinful pride.
*I received a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review*
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful.
Great Introduction to the Atonement Debate
By sojotheo
There are essentially two characteristics of a productive debate dialog: (1) a focused topic of conversation, and (2) a healthy and respectful discussion. Like many of the previous volumes in the Perspectives series, Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: Three Views executes this reality masterfully.
The discussion begins with a helpful introduction to the debate by Mark Snoeberger, and concludes with a much appreciated summary by Andrew Naselli. Snoeberger ushers the reader into the discussion by detailing the importance of the topic, or lack thereof (p. 1), as well as the primary question of discussion—“For whom was Christ a substitute?” (p. 6). This is an important point to note because the book is narrowly focused upon the substitutional aspect of the atonement within the views of atonement that affirm penal substitution, and thus is limited to a specific vein of the Protestant conversation (p. 6). Naselli closes the book with a brief summary, including helpful charts, and identifies “10 Ways to Create Unhealthy Schism over the Extent of the Atonement” (p. 216–227). This is a helpful and much appreciated reminder as the reader exits the written discussion.
Between the introduction and conclusion the reader finds three essays and the corresponding responses by the opposing authors: (1) Definite Atonement, (2) General Atonement, and (3) Multi-Intentions Atonement. First, Carl Truman defends the Definite Atonement (“limited atonement”) position, arguing that the question of the extent of the atonement is merely an inference deduced from its nature and efficacy (p. 21). For Truman the debate rests heavily upon the nature of Christ’s mediation, “specifically as it relates to the unity of the intention that undergirds his priestly work of sacrifice and intercession” (p. 22). Second, Grant Osborne defends the General Atonement (“universal atonement”) position, arguing that, “Christ has died sufficiently for all but efficiently for those who find faith in his atoning death” (p. 81–82). Osborne presents a solid defense of his position, discussing both the positive and negative arguments for General Atonement. Third, John Hammett defends the Multi-Intentions Atonement (“hypothetical universal atonement”) position, arguing that the atonement is both universal (or general), particular (or limited), and cosmic. Hammett offers a fitting contribution to the discussion and the placement appears intentional, as much of Hammett’s essay provides an additional perspective upon the earlier arguments presented by Truman and Osborne.
In short, Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: Three Views provides what it promises to deliver. The discussion is narrowly focused and the authors stay within this framework extremely well. Regardless of ones level of investment, this book will prove to be a beneficial introduction to the ongoing dialog. The only complaint (apart from the theological disagreements intentionally avoided in this review) is the lack of a bibliography for further investigation on the various positions. Of course, this information can be found in the footnotes, which I would highly recommend that the reader avoid overlooking.
**I received a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review**
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful.
It's okay, recommend
By Austin
Atonement. It doesn’t seem like it’s a debated topic, but it most certainly is. It is typically debated between Calvinist and Arminians as to the extent of it. Both sides agree that those saved have been cover by the blood of Christ, there is no doubt about it. However, the debate comes about when it turns to those who are not saved, what about them? Calvinists (this excludes “four-pointers”) affirm that those who never come to salvation were never covered by the blood of Christ (Limited Atonement, Definite Atonement, Peculiar Atonement), while the Arminians state that even though they are not saved, the blood was still poured out for them (General Atonement). This is some general knowledge. However, you may be surprised that there is in fact a third view of atonement called the “Multiple Intentions View.” This view attempts to take a middle ground between Calvinists and Arminians.
This book was rather unique in it’s writing as it was set up in a “debate” form. There was a simple introduction by the “overseers” - Andrew David Nasally and Mark A. Snoeberger - that provides general information about the topic. Then, they let one person present their view and why they believe it is biblical. Then, the other contributors (in this case, the other two contributors) would provide their responses. Then it would move onto the next view and the process would be repeated until each side could prevent their view and let the other contributors provide their thoughts. Then, a thoughtful conclusion was provided for the reader.
Starting off the debate was Carl R. Trueman of Westminster Theological Seminary arguing for Definite Atonement (which we at Studies in the Scriptures agrees to). He provides a well-thought case for Definite Atonement and addresses several objections to it. However, it could’ve been taken a little further to provide even a tighter case (as the reader will find in the rebuttals). This was quite the lengthy chapter, but rather short considering the content unpacked - even with the liberal amount of footnotes included. Followed by a clear case were the responses of Thomas H McCall (with Grant R. Osborne) and John S. Hammett. McCall and Osborne defending General Atonement took their time unpacking Trueman’s arguments and pointing out apparent errors in Definite Atonement while Hammett generally agreed with Trueman since he was defending the Multiple-Intentions View. Overall, the first chapter was a very informative read.
Come to the second chapter (of four) is where it begins to go down hill - and not because it was about General Atonement. The second, as stated, begins to argue for General Atonement with Grant R. Osborne of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School taking the lead (Osborne had to pass off his duties when it came to the responses to McCall due to serious health complications). Although there was great writing on General Atonement, at some point, the topic gradually began to shift to Definite Atonement and explaining largely why it is erroneous and stayed there. This was rather disappointing as I was more interested in the exegesis of Scriptures supporting General Atonement. (And for arguing for an Arminians perspective, he largely used Calvinists - which is good in understanding the other side, but no so much when trying to prove your side.) Followed by this were the responses of Carl Trueman and Hammett - Trueman obviously denying this and Hammett somewhat siding with it as previous.
Come chapter three, John S. Hammett of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary supporting his Multiple-Intentions View. This view attempts to take the middle ground between Definite Atonement and General Atonement. However, attempting to take the middle ground in a controversial issue, you tend to tip your hand one way or the other - and you can definitely tell here. It would seem that Hammett tends to focus mores on the Calvinist view rather than the Arminian view. He then provides three intentions of Christ’s atonement: universal, particular, and cosmic. He spends considerable time on the first two, but not knowing what he meant by cosmic intention, I was hoping he’d spend a little more time in it, which he does not. It seemed to be an after thought. Followed by his case were the responses of Thomas H. McCall (with Grant Osbourne) and then Carl Trueman.
Followed by this was the conclusion provided by the editors. This conclusion took all the chapters that the contributors provided and summarized it. They also went about providing just a little more detail to help the reader understand a little more about the disagreements. Then, to benefit all the readers, they provided ways to go about interacting with other Christians about this topic if they held to a different viewpoint than yours. They say that since this isn't a doctrine that hinders someone’s coming to faith in Jesus Christ and not denying the essential doctrines, then there is no need to have a sinful schism to come about.
All these men appeared to be cordial with each other in the other persons views and their responses - although there was the subtle, but occasional, cheap shot. They all set their view out clearly, addressed support for their view, possible objections, and misconceptions of their views. Although I wish each contributor could have spent a little more time unpacking their view, they did considerably well considering the topic. If anyone wants to understand the perspectives a little better and have a reference material to add to their library, I do recommend this in the end.
Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic PDF
Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic EPub
Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic Doc
Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic iBooks
Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic rtf
Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic Mobipocket
Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 ViewsFrom B&H Academic Kindle
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar