DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Limited Atonement Introduction the Doctrine of the Atonement Is A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Five Points of Calvinism Limited Atonement Introduction The doctrine of the atonement is a doctrine which is fundamental to the Christian faith. The Hebrew word for “atonement” is used about 150 times in the Old Testament and it has the literal meaning of “to cover over.” It is a word used to denote the process of making reconciliation. This word is used in Leviticus 17:11 to describe the shedding of blood to make an atonement. The idea expressed here is that the shedding of the blood of the sacrificial animal is able to cover over the guilt of the guilty criminal. This word also has the idea of “ransom” or “satisfaction” where the payment of the penalty or the price demanded is made. At times emphasis is also placed on the effects, where it brings about reconciliation (Lev 8:15; 6:30). The “atonement” in theology may be simply defined as “the satisfaction of divine justice by the Lord Jesus Christ in his active and passive obedience, which procured salvation for His people.” (Alan Cairns, Dictionary of Theological Terms, 44). A proper understanding of this doctrine is necessary for us to properly appreciate the nature of the salvation Christ earned on our behalf. In the study of the doctrine of the atonement, one important aspect concerns the intent and the extent of the atonement. This is where the doctrine of limited atonement comes in. The doctrine of limited atonement is the third point of Calvinism and it follows logically after the first and second points. Because man is totally depraved, they are spiritually dead and there is nothing that man can do to save himself. Since this is the case, man left to himself will never choose God. God who is sovereign, is under no obligation to save man, however, out of His own good pleasure and will, He unconditionally chose some to be saved. Having elected those whom He will save before the foundation of the world, the means of salvation has to be procured. Salvation has to be earned and the work of atonement has to be accomplished. The Lord Jesus Christ through His life and death accomplished this atoning work. The question which concerns us then is: when the Lord Jesus Christ died on the cross, did He pay for the sins of the whole world, or only for the sins of the elect? This question may be phrased another way: when the Lord Jesus Christ died on the cross, did He merely die to make salvation possible for all man, or did He die to actually pay for the sins of and save a particular group of people – His elect? The question concerns the intent and the extent of the atonement. A secondary question relating to this issue must also be answered: If Christ died only for the elect, and it will be show that He did, can the gospel be offered to the all man indiscriminately? How should we understand the terms in the Bible which carries a universal tone regarding the salvation of man? 1 The Five Points of Calvinism The Issue and Various Views The disagreement concerning this doctrine of essentially revolves around the intent and the extent of the atonement and what the atonement accomplished. The various views held are these: Arminianism After the death of Jacob Arminius, his followers presented their five articles of Remonstrance in protest against the doctrines of the Dutch Reformed Church. The second article describes their view of the extent of the atonement: “That, agreeably thereto, Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world, died for all men and for every man, so that he has obtained for them all, by his death on the cross, redemption, and the forgiveness of sins; yet that no one actually enjoys this forgiveness of sins, except the believer, according to the word of the Gospel of John iii. 16: “God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life”; and in the First Epistle of John ii. 2: “And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” (The Five Articles of the Remonstrance - http://www.crivoice.org/creedremonstrants.html). In short, the Arminian’s view is known as the doctrine of universal atonement. This position states that the Lord Jesus Christ died for all man, making salvation possible for all. The intent, purpose and extent of Christ’s death were therefore the salvation of all man, and Christ’s sacrifice has placed all man in a savable condition. The condition required to procure this salvation is faith. The serious problem with this position is that the Scripture shows that not every man is saved. If Christ died with the intent and purpose to save the whole world, and yet not everyone is saved, then Christ would have failed in what He set out to accomplish. Amyraldism Amyraldism is the view taught by Moses Amyraut and is sometimes seen as a compromise between Calvinism and Arminianism. Amyraldism is also sometimes known as four-point Calvinism. The main difference between Amyraldism and Arminianism is that while Arminianism rejects all five points of Calvinism, Amyraldism rejects only one – the doctrine of limited atonement. It claims to be able to reconcile the four other points of Calvinism with its form of universal atonement also known as “hypothetical universalism.” Simply put, Amyraldism “maintains that Christ died for all men alike, making all men savable, with actual salvation conditioned on individual faith” (http://www.reformationtheology.com/2006/11/the_amyraldian_view_undone.php ). 2 The Five Points of Calvinism Amyraldism differs from Calvinism in that it sees God’s choosing of some to be saved as following the atonement made by Christ to make salvation possible. Hyper-Calvinism “Hyper-Calvinism is a position that teaches that because Christ died only for the elect, the gospel is made available only to a chosen few. They deny the free offer of the gospel to every one. Below is an example of their position, as described in the statement of faith of Gospel Standard Baptist Churches (http://www.5solas.org/media.php?id=574): XXIV We believe that the invitations of the Gospel, being spirit and life,* are intended only for those who have been made by the blessed Spirit to feel their lost state as sinners and their need of Christ as their Saviour, and to repent of and forsake their sins. (Isa. 55:1, John 7:37, Prov. 28:13, Matt. 11:28-30, John 6:37.) Note - * That is, under the influence of the Holy Spirit. XXV We deny that Christ died for all mankind. (Matt. 25:31-46, John 10:11, John 10:15, John 10:26.) XXVI We deny duty faith and duty repentance - these terms signifying that it is every man's duty spiritually and savingly to repent and believe (Gen. 6:5, Gen 8:21, Matt. 15:19, Jer. 17:9, John 6:44, John 6:65.) We deny also that there is any capability in man by nature to any spiritual good whatever. So that we reject the doctrine that men in a state of nature should be exhorted to believe in or turn to God of themselves. (John 12:39-40, Eph. 2:8, Rom. 8:7-8, 1 Cor. 4:7.) XXIX While we believe that the gospel is to be preached in or proclaimed to all the world, as in Mark 16:15, we deny offers of grace; that is to say, that the gospel is to be offered indiscriminately to all. (2 Cor. 4:3-4.) XXXIII Therefore, that for ministers in the present day to address unconverted persons, or indiscriminately all in a mixed congregation, calling upon them savingly to repent, believe, and receive Christ, or perform any other acts dependent upon the new creative power of the Holy Ghost, is, on the one hand, to imply creature power, and, on the other, to deny the doctrine of special redemption. XXXIV We believe that any such expressions as convey to the hearers the belief that they possess a certain power to flee to the Saviour, to close in with Christ, to receive Christ, while in an unregenerate state, so that unless they do thus close with Christ, etc., they shall perish, are untrue, and must, therefore, be rejected. And we further believe that we have no Scripture warrant to take the exhortations in the Old Testament intended for the Jews in national covenant with God, and apply them in a spiritual and saving sense to unregenerated men.” 3 The Five Points of Calvinism Calvinism The Reformed position and also the position held by the B-P Church in Singapore, is that the intent and extent of the atonement is limited and efficacious to only the elect. To avoid misunderstandings sometimes the expression “particular atonement” is used to define this position. This position holds that those whom God has chosen to save, He does actually save them by the atoning work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Calvinism also recognises the universal aspect of the atonement, where, by virtue of the sufficiency of Christ’s atoning work, salvation is available and sufficient for all. This is also based on the understanding of God’s general love for all man. The offer of the Gospel therefore may be made to all freely and sincerely. This Westminster Confession of Faith expresses this doctrine: VI. As God has appointed the elect unto glory, so has He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto.
Recommended publications
  • The Five Points of Calvinism

    The Five Points of Calvinism

    • TULIP The Five Points of Calvinism instructor’s guide Bethlehem College & Seminary 720 13th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55415 612.455.3420 [email protected] | bcsmn.edu Copyright © 2007, 2012, 2017 by Bethlehem College & Seminary All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, modified, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Scripture taken from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. Copyright © 2007 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. • TULIP The Five Points of Calvinism instructor’s guide Table of Contents Instructor’s Introduction Course Syllabus 1 Introduction from John Piper 3 Lesson 1 Introduction to the Doctrines of Grace 5 Lesson 2 Total Depravity 27 Lesson 3 Irresistible Grace 57 Lesson 4 Limited Atonement 85 Lesson 5 Unconditional Election 115 Lesson 6 Perseverance of the Saints 141 Appendices Appendix A Historical Information 173 Appendix B Testimonies from Church History 175 Appendix C Ten Effects of Believing in the Five Points of Calvinism 183 Instructor’s Introduction It is our hope and prayer that God would be pleased to use this curriculum for his glory. Thus, the intention of this curriculum is to spread a passion for the supremacy of God in all things for the joy of all peoples through Jesus Christ. This curriculum is guided by the vision and values of Bethlehem College & Seminary which are more fully explained at bcsmn.edu. At the Bethlehem College & Semianry website, you will find the God-centered philosophy that undergirds and motivates everything we do.
  • Calvinism and Limited Atonement Isaiah 53:6; Hebrews 2:9 and Others

    Calvinism and Limited Atonement Isaiah 53:6; Hebrews 2:9 and Others

    CALVINISM AND LIMITED ATONEMENT ISAIAH 53:6; HEBREWS 2:9 AND OTHERS Text: Isaiah 53:6; Hebrews 2:9 Isaiah 53:6 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. Hebrews 2:9 9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. Introduction: Of the five points of Calvin’s philosophy, (and I call it "philosophy" instead of "theology" because in this particular point, it is 100% contrary to the revealed will of God as given to us in the Bible, therefore, it cannot properly be called "theology") the weakest link is his so-called false teaching on the "LIMITED ATONEMENT," or the "L" of the T.U.L.I.P. acronym of Calvinism. - 1 - It is interesting to me that this point is the center of this deadly flower. We will consider the Basic Definition, Blatant Distortion, and the Biblical Dispute, of Limited Atonement. 1. BASIC DEFINITION OF LIMITED ATONEMENT By “Limited Atonement” we refer to the belief which states that Christ did not die for “all or everyone” but rather died only for the elect. While it is true that only the saved benefit from Christ’s death on the cross, Christ died for all people. 1 John 2:1-2 1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not.
  • Total Depravity

    Total Depravity

    TULIP: A FREE GRACE PERSPECTIVE PART 1: TOTAL DEPRAVITY ANTHONY B. BADGER Associate Professor of Bible and Theology Grace Evangelical School of Theology Lancaster, Pennsylvania I. INTRODUCTION The evolution of doctrine due to continued hybridization has pro- duced a myriad of theological persuasions. The only way to purify our- selves from the possible defects of such “theological genetics” is, first, to recognize that we have them and then, as much as possible, to set them aside and disassociate ourselves from the systems which have come to dominate our thinking. In other words, we should simply strive for truth and an objective understanding of biblical teaching. This series of articles is intended to do just that. We will carefully consider the truth claims of both Calvinists and Arminians and arrive at some conclusions that may not suit either.1 Our purpose here is not to defend a system, but to understand the truth. The conflicting “isms” in this study (Calvinism and Arminianism) are often considered “sacred cows” and, as a result, seem to be solidified and in need of defense. They have become impediments in the search for truth and “barriers to learn- ing.” Perhaps the emphatic dogmatism and defense of the paradoxical views of Calvinism and Arminianism have impeded the theological search for truth much more than we realize. Bauman reflects, I doubt that theology, as God sees it, entails unresolvable paradox. That is another way of saying that any theology that sees it [paradox] or includes it is mistaken. If God does not see theological endeavor as innately or irremediably paradoxical, 1 For this reason the author declines to be called a Calvinist, a moderate Calvinist, an Arminian, an Augustinian, a Thomist, a Pelagian, or a Semi- Pelagian.
  • The Nature and Extent of the Atonement in Lutheran

    The Nature and Extent of the Atonement in Lutheran

    THE N A T U R E A N D E X T E N T O F T H E ATONEMENT I N L U T H E R A N T H E O L O G Y DAVID SCAER, TH.D. I. The Problem The· conflict concerning the nature and extent of the atonement arose in Christian theology because of attempts to reconcile rationally apparently conflicting statements in the Holy Scriptures on the atone- ment and election. Briefly put, passages relating to the atonement are universal in scope including all men and those relating to election apply only to a limited number. Basically there have been three approaches to this tension between a universal atonement and a limited election. One approach is to understand the atonement in light of the election. Since obviously there are many who are not eventually saved, the atonement offered by Christ really applied not to them but only to those who are finally saved, i.e., the elect. This is the Calvinistic or Reformed view. The second approach understands the election in light of the atonement. This view credits each individual with the ability to make a choice of his own free will to believe in Christ. Since Christ died for all men and since man is responsible for his own damnation, therefore he at least cooperates with the Holy Spirit in coming to faith. This is the Arminian or synergistic view, also widely held in Methodism. The third view* is that of classical Lutheran theology. This position as set down in the Formula of Concord (1580) does not attempt to resolve what the Holy Scriptures state con- cerning atonement and election.
  • Hunter Bailey Phd Thesis 08.Pdf (1.357Mb)

    Hunter Bailey Phd Thesis 08.Pdf (1.357Mb)

    VIA MEDIA ALIA: RECONSIDERING THE CONTROVERSIAL DOCTRINE OF UNIVERSAL REDEMPTION IN THE THEOLOGY OF JAMES FRASER OF BREA (1639-1699) A thesis submitted to New College, the School of Divinity of the University of Edinburgh in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2008 By Hunter M. Bailey M.Th. (2003) University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK M.Div. (2002) Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson, MS, USA B.A. (1998) University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA I hereby declare that this thesis has been composed by myself and is the result of my own independent research. It has not, in any form, been submitted or accepted for any other degree or professional qualification, as specified in the regulations of the University of Edinburgh. All quotations in this thesis have been distinguished by quotation marks, and all sources of outside information have received proper acknowledgment. _________________________________ Hunter M. Bailey 16 June 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents....................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements.................................................................................................... v Abstract..................................................................................................................... vii Abbreviations............................................................................................................ ix Section A Chapter 1: An Introduction..........................................................................
  • Biblical and Logical Warrant for Limited Atonement

    Biblical and Logical Warrant for Limited Atonement

    M. Howell 1-10-04 Biblical and Logical Warrant for Definite Atonement He entered once for all into the Holy Place, taking not the blood of goats and calves but his own blood, thus securing eternal redemption. -Hebrews 9:12 The crux of the entire debate surrounding limited atonement is whether Christ is a real Savior or a potential Savior. Did Christ actually or potentially accomplish His purpose for dying for our sins? It is my position that Christ's death actually accomplished its purpose, that is, that it ensured the salvation of His people rather than merely provide the possibility of salvation for everyone who believes. This, therefore, makes Christ’s atonement limited in its efficaciousness. David Steele and Curtis Thomas write, “Christ’s saving work was limited in that it was designed to save some and not others, but it was not limited in value for it was of infinite worth and would have secured salvation for everyone if this had been God’s intention.”1 But as we shall soon see, regardless of your theological assumptions, the atonement is limited. That is why I prefer the term definite atonement to limited atonement. I shall be arguing for definite atonement in two parts, the first part consisting of the Biblical basis for definite atonement, and the second part consisting of the Logical basis for definite atonement. This separation should in no way imply that the Bible should or even could be divorced from logic. God is a God of logic and His special revelation is consequently inherently logical.
  • The Reformed Presbyterian Theological Journal

    The Reformed Presbyterian Theological Journal

    FALL 2019 volume 6 issue 1 3 FROM RUTHERFORD HALL Dr. Barry J. York 4 FOUR CENTURIES AGO: AN HISTORICAL SURVEY OF THE SYNOD OF DORT Dr. David G. Whitla 16 THE FIRST HEADING: DIVINE ELECTION AND REPROBATION Rev. Thomas G. Reid, Jr. 25 THE SECOND HEADING - CHRIST’S DEATH AND HUMAN REDEMPTION THROUGH IT: LIMITED ATONEMENT AT THE SYNOD OF DORDT AND SOME CONTEMPORARY THEOLOGICAL DEBATES Dr. Richard C. Gamble 33 THE THIRD HEADING: HUMAN CORRUPTION Rev. Keith A. Evans 39 THE FOURTH HEADING: “BOTH DELIGHTFUL AND POWERFUL” THE DOCTRINE OF IRRESISTIBLE GRACE IN THE CANONS OF DORT Dr. C. J. Williams 47 THE FIFTH HEADING: THE PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS Dr. Barry J. York STUDY UNDER PASTORS The theological journal of the Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary Description Reformed Presbyterian Theological Journal is the online theological journal of the Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary. Reformed Presbyterian Theological Journal is provided freely by RPTS faculty and other scholars to encourage the theological growth of the church in the historic, creedal, Reformed faith. Reformed Presbyterian Theological Journal is published biannually online at the RPTS website in html and pdf. Readers are free to use the journal and circulate articles in written, visual, or digital form, but we respectfully request that the content be unaltered and the source be acknowledged by the following statement. “Used by permission. Article first appeared in Reformed Presbyterian Theological Journal, the online theological journal of the Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary (rpts.edu).” e d i t o r s General Editor: Senior Editor: Assistant Editor: Contributing Editors: Barry York Richard Gamble Jay Dharan Tom Reid [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] C.
  • Calvinism and Arminianism Are Tw

    Calvinism and Arminianism Are Tw

    K-Group week 3 Question: "Calvinism vs. Arminianism - which view is correct?" Answer: Calvinism and Arminianism are two systems of theology that attempt to explain the relationship between God's sovereignty and man's responsibility in the matter of salvation. Calvinism is named for John Calvin, a French theologian who lived from 1509-1564. Arminianism is named for Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch theologian who lived from 1560-1609. Both systems can be summarized with five points. Calvinism holds to the total depravity of man while Arminianism holds to partial depravity. Calvinism’s doctrine of total depravity states that every aspect of humanity is corrupted by sin; therefore, human beings are unable to come to God on their own accord. Partial depravity states that every aspect of humanity is tainted by sin, but not to the extent that human beings are unable to place faith in God of their own accord. Note: classical Arminianism rejects “partial depravity” and holds a view very close to Calvinistic “total depravity” (although the extent and meaning of that depravity are debated in Arminian circles). In general, Arminians believe there is an “intermediate” state between total depravity and salvation. In this state, made possible by prevenient grace, the sinner is being drawn to Christ and has the God-given ability to choose salvation. Calvinism includes the belief that election is unconditional, while Arminianism believes in conditional election. Unconditional election is the view that God elects individuals to salvation based entirely on His will, not on anything inherently worthy in the individual. Conditional election states that God elects individuals to salvation based on His foreknowledge of who will believe in Christ unto salvation, thereby on the condition that the individual chooses God.
  • The Idea of Medieval Heresy in Early Modern France

    The Idea of Medieval Heresy in Early Modern France

    The Idea of Medieval Heresy in Early Modern France Bethany Hume PhD University of York History September 2019 2 Abstract This thesis responds to the historiographical focus on the trope of the Albigensians and Waldensians within sixteenth-century confessional polemic. It supports a shift away from the consideration of medieval heresy in early modern historical writing merely as literary topoi of the French Wars of Religion. Instead, it argues for a more detailed examination of the medieval heretical and inquisitorial sources used within seventeenth-century French intellectual culture and religious polemic. It does this by examining the context of the Doat Commission (1663-1670), which transcribed a collection of inquisition registers from Languedoc, 1235-44. Jean de Doat (c.1600-1683), President of the Chambre des Comptes of the parlement of Pau from 1646, was charged by royal commission to the south of France to copy documents of interest to the Crown. This thesis aims to explore the Doat Commission within the wider context of ideas on medieval heresy in seventeenth-century France. The periodization “medieval” is extremely broad and incorporates many forms of heresy throughout Europe. As such, the scope of this thesis surveys how thirteenth-century heretics, namely the Albigensians and Waldensians, were portrayed in historical narrative in the 1600s. The field of study that this thesis hopes to contribute to includes the growth of historical interest in medieval heresy and its repression, and the search for original sources by seventeenth-century savants. By exploring the ideas of medieval heresy espoused by different intellectual networks it becomes clear that early modern European thought on medieval heresy informed antiquarianism, historical writing, and ideas of justice and persecution, as well as shaping confessional identity.
  • The Five Points of Calvinism

    The Five Points of Calvinism

    THE FIVE POINTS OF CALVINISM "Weighed And Found Wanting" TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction MAJOR SECTION ONE: EXPLANATIONS 1. Total Depravity Explained 2. Unconditional Election Explained 3. Limited Atonement Explained 4. Irresistible Grace Explained 5. Perseverance of the Saints Explained MAJOR SECTION TWO: COUNTER POINTS 6. Calvinistic Total Depravity Refuted 7. Unconditional Election Refuted 8. Limited Atonement Refuted 9. Irresistible Grace Refuted 10. Calvinistic Perseverance of the Saints Refuted Conclusion The Lazy Man's Guide to Understanding Calvinism An Even Lazier Man's Guide to Understanding Calvinism INTRODUCTION For more than a decade I was the host of a Christian talk show called 'Scripturally Speaking.' On many different occasions the topic of Calvinism in general, and the Five Points of Calvinism in particular, was introduced either by me, an in-studio guest, or a caller. I can clearly remember one discussion in which a Calvinist guest was debating with an Arminian caller over the question of whether or not predestination was taught in Scripture. When the question before us was simply a matter of affirming or denying predestination, I appeared to be on the side of my Calvinist guest. The caller expressed surprise at my agreement with my guest because he incorrectly thought that I must have been a Calvinist because of this agreement. When I explained to him that I was not a Calvinist, the caller's surprise then turned to confusion. Affirmation vs. Definition My guest then admitted that he was also surprised, if not confused, for he too wrongly assumed I was a Calvinist because I agreed that predestination was taught in Scripture.
  • The Historical Denial of the Free Offer

    The Historical Denial of the Free Offer

    The Historical Denial of the Free Offer Modern Calvinist leaders who teach the free offer usually claim that they have support from historic Reformed theology. This is false. They frequently claim that Calvin supports their position and that the chief Reformed standards justify their claims. All this is false also. Historic Calvinism, both in its accepted standards and as expressed by its main theologians, denies the free offer; indeed, it would recognise the teaching of modern free offer preachers as Amyraldism, and condemn it as error. Now such is the lack of knowledge on these matters amongst today’s churchgoers that my claims here must be evidenced. I am happy to comply with this to demonstrate the truth. This paper is written to show what the foremost Reformed standards and theologians teach regarding the free offer. What is the free offer? The free offer is the teaching that: 1. God has a good intent to reprobates. 2. God loves all men without exception. 3. God desires, and even wills, the salvation of all men. 4. God gives grace to all men to some degree. To this the following is at least implied: 1. The atonement of Christ is universal in scope; he died for all. 2. Conversion is conditioned upon the will of the sinner. The Arminian basis of this theology is plain to see. Where does this come from? This teaching was once restricted to those who followed the school of Moses Amyraut (or Amyrald, 1596-1664) who sought to unite the universalism of Lutherans with the sovereign particularity of Calvinists.
  • The Death of Death in the Death of Christ by John Owen J

    The Death of Death in the Death of Christ by John Owen J

    The Death of Death in the Death of Christ By John Owen J. I. Packer's Introduction Chapter 8 from: A QUEST FOR GODLINESS The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life by J. I. Packer J. I. Packer's introduction to a 1958 reprint of John Owen's, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (Banner of Truth: London) The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (Owen Works, X:139:148) is a polemical piece, designed to show among other things, that the doctrine of universal redemption is unscriptural and destructive of the gospel. There are many, therefore, to whom it is not likely to be of interest. Those who see no need for doctrinal exactness and have no time for theological debates which show up divisions between so- called evangelicals may well regret its reappearance. Some may find the very sound of Owen's thesis so shocking that they will refuse to read his book at all, so passionate a thing is prejudice, and so proud are we of our theological shibboleths. But it is hoped that this classic may find itself readers of a different spirit. There are signs today of a new upsurge of interest in the theology of the Bible: a new readiness to test traditions, to search the Scriptures and to think through the faith. It is to those who share this readiness that Owen's treatise is now offered, in the belief that it will help us in one of the most urgent tasks facing evangelical Christendom today - the recovery of the gospel.