The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum The History of Calvinism

Tom,
I know it's difficult sometimes to read on a monitor and we tend to scan but you can find the name of the author in my previous post HERE


William

.

If that is the case, I can sort of understand where William is coming from.
If I understand how you described it, although I am sure that it isn't talking about an effectual universal love for all mankind. If I read that statement with out some knowledge of the debate, I would be thinking that God loves everyone in the same manner. This would make it an Arminian Gospel, regardless of whether or not it claimed to be Calvinist.
Do you understand the danger of this?
I realize Scripture says that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that is a lot different from what they appear to be saying.

Tom

I've been listening to the lecture series recommended by the original post in this thread. I've got a couple of questions that I'm hoping someone here can answer.

Towards the end of Curt Daniel's lecture on "Covenant Theology", he says that A.W. Pink was a "hypercalvinist". I read Pink's The Sovereignty of God at Pilgrim's encouragement, and I found it convincing. I didn't read anything in it that I would label "hypercalvinist". But I haven't read everything that Pink wrote either. So here's the first of the two questions: Was Pink a hypercalvinist?

In Daniel's lecture on "Amyraldism", he says that he's never found in any of Calvin's writings any indication that Calvin believed in Limited Atonement. Since Limited Atonement looks totally Biblical to me, it's difficult for me to believe that Calvin didn't believe in it. But I haven't read everything that Calvin wrote either. So here's the second question: Did Calvin believe in Limited Atonement, and if so, where's the proof?

Thank you kindly.

C_R

From what I gather, in some of Pinks earlier writings he rejected the terms ‘free-agency’ and ‘free-will’ in relation to ‘human responsibility’ and also the gospel being presented as an ‘offer’. His writings improved however by becoming clearer in proclaiming the freeness of the gospel and from what I have read he definitely was not a hyper-Calvinist.


William


.

I agree with William's information re: A.W. Pink. He matured as he grew in the faith and became more "mainstream" in regards to the doctrines of grace.

As for Calvin not teaching Limited Atonement, that is almost laughable. There have been several attempts to make John Calvin an Arminian over the years which of course have failed miserably. I think the two linked items below should suffice as a rebuttal to the assertion:

1. [i]Calvin and the Calvinists[/i] - book review.

2. John Calvin's Position on the Atonement, by Paul Helm.

In His grace,