{"id":4631,"date":"2018-04-26T23:58:53","date_gmt":"2018-04-26T23:58:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/baonline.cog7engage.net\/?p=4631"},"modified":"2023-08-29T11:22:28","modified_gmt":"2023-08-29T17:22:28","slug":"talking-tulip-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/baonline.cog7engage.net\/talking-tulip-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Talking TULIP: Part 2"},"content":{"rendered":"

As we progress on a journey exploring our Statement of Faith, we continue to look at the five letters of the Calvinist TULIP. Previously, we discovered that our Statement of Faith and Scripture support total depravity. But we observed that unconditional election is not a teaching clearly found in either. What about the L in TULIP?<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Limited atonement<\/h2>\n

Also known as particular redemption<\/em>, limited atonement<\/em> is the teaching that Jesus\u2019 death was only intended<\/em> to atone for the sins of the elect. For those not elected by God, no atonement is provided for their sin. Further, the atonement made possible by Jesus\u2019 death is effectual<\/em> in every case. That is, everyone who is elected will be atoned for. There is no possibility that an elect person will ultimately be condemned.<\/p>\n

Theologian Walter Elwell summarizes seven key arguments in support of limited atonement:<\/p>\n