In his Theology of the New Testament (Zondervan, 2005), Frank Thielman responds to the claim that justification is secondary to participation with Christ in Paul’s theology. Thielman does not agree, but he does say that it is true that “Paul’s references to the death of Christ . . . . Continue Reading »
One of Dabney’s answers to the charge that imputation is unjust is tat “God forbids imputation of capital guilt by human magistrates,” but “He customarily claims the exercise of it in His own government.” The difference he explains by saying “Human magistrates . . . . Continue Reading »
Dabney thinks that Calvinists have offered “unsatisfactory” answers to objections to its doctrine of definite atonement. Two sorts of objections in particular: “From the universal offer of atonement through Christ, and from Scripture.” He answers these objections, and then . . . . Continue Reading »
In a summary of the theology of Matthias Scheeben, von Balthasar notes that he “proposes a Christian theology of sacrifice which strongly rejects the Baroque theory of ‘destruction’ and returns to the wholly personal and spiritual concept of sacrifice of the Fathers, especially of . . . . Continue Reading »
Jonathan Moore’s book focuses on John Preston, but he also deals with other English theologians who taught some form of universal atonement theology, including Ussher and John Davenant, the latter one of the English delegates to Dort. Preston combined particularist and universalist by . . . . Continue Reading »
From Moore’s book again, Perkins writing: “the raising up of Christ is . . . his actuall absolution from their sins, for whom he died; for even as the Father by delivering Christ to death, did in very deede condemne their sinnes imputed unto Christ, for whome he died; so by raising him . . . . Continue Reading »
William Perkins has been accused of being “addicted to adding the qualifying phrase ‘for the elect’ to universalist Biblical statements.” In his recent book on John Preston and English Hypothetical Universalism (Eerdmans), Jonathan Moore argues that this assessment is . . . . Continue Reading »
DH Williams has a helpful article on justification by faith in Hilary, in a recent issue of Pro Ecclesia . He concludes, in part, “the basis of justification by faith was not at heart a matter of soteriology, but of Christology, especially when it came to interpreting the divine intent and . . . . Continue Reading »
Nicholas Wolterstorff analyzes the “conundrum” of atonement in Kant’s treatment of rational religion. We need to be forgiven for the evil we’ve done, and we are incapable of doing this ourselves. God has to do it. Yet, Kant assumes a radical form of autonomy, which makes our . . . . Continue Reading »
By definition, justification must be by grace. Since the eyes are organs of judgment in Scripture, to find “favor in one’s eyes” is to be justified. Plus, “favor” just means “grace.” We can put it more strongly: Justified by grace is redundant, since . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
