Opothleyahola

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Christianity: Arminianism / Methodism / Evangelical High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Arminianism (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by Methodism work group (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Evangelical Christianity (assessed as Mid-importance). Theology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I redirected this page to Atonement; we can change this when there's more to add. KHM03 14:12, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The following question was asked (inappropriately) in the text of the article by User:74.195.235.211. I have moved it here for comments.

(A Request: Would someone who understands the position of unlimited atonement explain in this section what those who hold it specifically believe about what Christ did on the cross so that He is now able to "offer a substitutionary atonement to all"? There's still some confusion on this topic concerning that. Seeing that this position says "He died on behalf of all men" but "does not pay for the penalty for those who deny Him" - it would be very useful. Thanks.)

--Flex (talk|contribs) 15:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The author indicates that unlimited atonement has been the majority view. Yet while this might currently be the majority view amongst Christians in the Western world, it seems that the majority of Protestants over the course of church history have maintained the doctrine of limited atonement (Lutherans, Presbyterians, many Baptists, Congregationalists, Reformed Churches, etc.) And so it seems like the author(s) of this article may be presenting the view to which he, she, or they hold in a way that bolsters unlimited atonement over and against limited atonement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.145.16.78 (talk) 14:38, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"However it is the position of a majority of professing Christians that the atonement was held as unlimited by most of the early Church Fathers (ECF)" This statement needs citation and is of dubious worth. Of what value is it that "the majority of professing Christians" attest to a certain element of history? What do historians of the early church have to say on this matter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.88.112.129 (talk) 04:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article begins by saying that this is the majority doctrine in Protestant Christianity, yet gives no mention of other Christian churches that accept it, most notably the Roman Catholic Church. I propose editing the wording for the sake of inclusiveness and completion. 2607:EA00:104:1C00:69B8:8D15:14AB:23D4 (talk) 16:30, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At the end of the "Historical background" section of the article there is a broken link and someone has put the text "DEAD LINK" in the article after the broken link.

I'm not sure what should have happened here, but I don't think appending a link with "DEAD LINK" is the correct action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.58.126 (talk) 16:34, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Unlimited atonement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141126125213/http://gbgm-umc.org:80/UMhistory/Wesley/sermons/serm-128.stm to http://gbgm-umc.org/umhistory/wesley/sermons/serm-128.stm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was surprised not to see Hebrews 9:28 quoted either for or against "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. (KJV)" - my emphasis - as this has been a sensitive issue in the wording of modern Eucharistic Prayers. 2A00:23C6:148A:9B01:3194:C94C:9B8A:E216 (talk) 13:00, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]