# Particular Redemption and Amyraldianism



## schwarzeneggerchia (Jun 29, 2012)

Can you help provide a cogent argument for limited atonement vs. amyraldianism (4 pt. Calvinism)


----------



## reformedman (Jun 29, 2012)

Best book on the subject is Abraham Kuyer - Particular Redemption.
He takes each of the opposition's most use verses and provides a proper exposition of each.
He also takes the supporting affirmative verses and builds a strong case.

It's good to keep in mind Amyraut's purpose for his view. The Jesuits wanted something to maintain God's sovereignty while refuting man's total-inability; particularly in free-will. So (in Amyraldianism), all men have a hypothetical atonement available, if they will just freely accept it. It's there if they want it. 

The root error here it seems, is that Christ didn't do anything on the cross actively. He prepped something on the cross which man has to finalize. In my opinion, the best argument against Amyraldianism which gets to the heart of the issue clearest and fastest is for both sides to agree to the right definition of the word 'propitiation'. If both sides agree that it satisfies payment, then you can then demonstrate verses which clearly indicate that the definitive work accomplished on the cross was propitiation.


----------

