A comparison between the views of Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley regarding the sovereignty of God
- Authors: Robertson, Alan Charles
- Date: 1977
- Subjects: Edwards, Jonathan, 1703-1758 , Wesley, John, 1703-1791 , Free will and determinism , Predestination -- History of doctrines , God -- Omniscience -- History of doctrines , Atonement
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Bachelor , BDiv
- Identifier: vital:1268 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1013067
- Description: The views of Edwards and Wesley regarding the sovereignty of God present a puzzle. On the face of things, both were successful evangelists while both held contrary doctrines of sovereignty. Does this mean that the doctrine of sovereignty is irrelevant? This thesis argues that the doctrine of sovereignty is crucial in evangelism and revival, and that the views of Edwards and Wesley regarding the sovereignity of God were in fact very similar. A useful framework for showing this is the Five Points of Calvinism, as well as the doctrines of justification by faith and the omnipotence of God.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 1977
An evaluaton of the subjective element in atonement doctrine
- Authors: Perkins, Edwin Alfred
- Date: 1967
- Subjects: Atonement , Subjectivity -- Religious aspects
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Bachelor , BDiv
- Identifier: vital:1266 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1013025
- Description: The Church has never formulated an official doctrine of the atonement. Unlike the Trinitarian and Christological doctrines, the atonement was never a major issue in the early ecumenical councils. This central mystery of the faith, which speaks of the restoring of the relationship between God and man through Jesus Christ, has resisted every attempt at 'a formulation or statement in a nutshell'. Tillich has suggested that the Church's refusal to state the doctrine in definite dogmatic terms, is the instinctive recognition of the indefiniteness which is introduced by the human element. This element means that the doctrine has a subjective as well as an objective element. Since in his view the subjective element depends on the incalculable reaction of men to God's provision of a Saviour the formulation of the doctrine must remain uncertain. While we will agree with Tillich that the atonement has an objective as well as a subjective side, we cannot agree that the failure to formulate a doctrine has only to do with the uncertainty implied by the will of men. Intro. p, 1.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 1967
The atonement : a brief discussion
- Authors: Hay, Thomas Alexander
- Date: 1958
- Subjects: Atonement , Satisfaction for sin
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Bachelor , BDiv
- Identifier: vital:1258 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1012233 , Atonement , Satisfaction for sin
- Description: This first section endeavours briefly to set out the problem, seeing it ln its proper context against the need it fulfils and its historical setting. It attempts to show something of the nature of sin and the need which sin creates; and asks the question Why Atonement? This question can only be answered by an appreciation of the meaning and power of sinfulness. Atonement is necessarily from God's side, and it is costly to God. An important factor in this section is the attempt to see the wholeness of Christ's work; to set the atonement in its true context within the life of Christ. An attempt is made to relate the atonement to the incarnation, The Word made flesh and dwelling among us; to the resurrection, which is not to be misunderstood as a mere evidential appendage to the cross, but to be seen as an essential factor in the salvation of men; and also to the ascension, to the problem of time and eternity, in that while Christ's work was once-for-all, it is nevertheless continued - it was in history, but is not bound within history. When this conception of the unity of Christ's work is grasped then we can turn to a consideration of the cross, always regarded by Faith as the very centre of the atonement. A brief survey is made of the Biblical teaching concerning salvation and the cross; and the centrality of the cross is interpreted sacrificially. Summary, p. x-xi.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 1958