Seems like Liberty University's president Jerry Falwell just identified Calvinism as heresy. Well... I have nothing much to say to such a deluded person, except to warn him that if he carries on blaspheming God's truth, he will have to answer to God for the serious offences he has done. And he should really stop believing in Substitutionary Atonement, unless he wants to be a universalist.
2 comments:
Could you explain a bit more about how believing in substitutionary atonement makes one a universalist? I dont quite get it... and what is the alternative to substitutionary atonement then
Munchy:
Eh.... no, I am not saying that believing in substitutionary atonement makes one a universalist. I myself believe in substitionary atonement; that Christ died on my behalf for my sins. What I am saying is that believing in Substitionary Atonement while denying particular redemption (i.e. Calvinism) logicaly leads to Universalism. After all, if Christ died for everyone, and he did indeed concretely pay the price for ALL their sins, then why should anyone go to hell? You say that they go there because they reject Christ. Well then, isen't unbelief sin too? Either Christ did concretely pay for all their sins, or He didn't. If He did, then all must be saved. If He didn't, then Christ did not die for all.
There are two alternatives to Substitutionary Atonement that I know of. The first which is embraced by true-blue Arminians is that Christ died to make Man savable. He did not die for Man's sins, but that they could be saved IF they believe in Christ. In other words, the believer appropriate the merits of Christ's atoninement by faith, which is then actualized in them via their salvation.
The second alternative, even more heretical, is the moral governmental theory of the atonement, embraced by heretics such as Charles G. Finney - Christ died as an example to Man of how much He loved them. Nothing much I would want to say about this.
Post a Comment