Justin Genus’s Reviews > The Cross and Salvation: The Doctrine of Salvation > Status Update

Calling's always been an odd bit in the ordo salutis to me. Interesting to see how diff groups conceive of it.

Not my fav chapter. Strong on atonement theories/dimensions. Weaker on extent/intention question and applications.

Demarest undermines his argument for a universal atonement by marshalling texts that dont not necessarily prove his case. That Christ died for "all" in some sense is clear (Heb 2:9, 2 Cor 5:14-15). That he propitated for all is not proven. Ultimately, his answer leaves numerous unanswered questions.

"We choose to ask the question, For whom did Christ intend to provide atonement through his suffering and death? Accordingly, we will divide the question in two parts. We inquire, first, into the provision Christ made via his death on the cross. And we explore, second, the application of the benefits gained by Calvary to sinners."

On its face, this seems like good framing for the extent question.

"God acted to save the sinful race in the way he did precisely because of who he is."

Demarest does well to peotect God's freedom in decreeing the best method of salvation as governed by His own nature. But he could have strengthened it by including the reality that God always pursues His highest glory (Is 48:11; Rom 9:22-23)

typo. "Solomon's son David"?

Propitiation distinguished from expitation clearly. Helpful. NT language demonstrates that almost all atonement theories capture an element of truth, but only PSA can rightly be considered central and necessary for the others.

Atonement in the NT section was edifying. Atonement in the OT assumes too much by flattening the meaning/point of atonement. But the section on the sufficiency of levitical sacrifice and the old covenant was very good.

Generous, clear treatment of the theories of atonement. Clearly doesnt want to unnecessarily discount those background ideas which have oft been foregrounded. Much easier to engage than Berkhof. I've got to go back to Packer's What Did the Cross Achieve? now.

He's not so nice to limitarians, using pejorative framing and misrepresenting the WCF, Turretin, and Owen. Good summaries nonetheless.