My doctrine class at college has reminded me of the limited atonement issue that I started but never finished discussing at the start of the year.
So when it comes to the atonement it can be said that generally unless you are a universalist or Pelagian you hold a limited view of the atonement. The atonement is still limited in who it ends up saving, if some are still left unsaved.
It seems in my understanding that at the Council or Dort (where they essentially put forward the 5 points of Calvinism), that point 3: Limited Atonement stipulated that Christ’s death on the cross for the sins of the world was sufficient for all but efficient only for the elect. This is how I have always understood this and seems to line up with Unlimited Limited atonement put forward by men such as Driscoll and Ware.
I cant see how limited atonement understood as only sufficient for elect is either logical or biblical. In addition unlimited atonement is actually limited, I cant see how when they propose only those who have faith will salvation be applied is greatly different to the view that the atonement is only efficient for the elect.
I’m still thinking this through and so your thoughts and corrections would be great.