tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post112629172804965184..comments2024-02-18T08:38:49.284-06:00Comments on Theological Meditations: Double Jeopardy?Tony Byrnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-19344651197114389562019-07-05T15:03:40.842-05:002019-07-05T15:03:40.842-05:00I am not arminian, in that I believe that God save...I am not arminian, in that I believe that God saves sinners monergistically without human cooperation, nobody can come to faith nor contribute anything, god in his sovereign grace brings sinners to faith. Faith is a gift of God that nobody should boast, we do not contribute one thing it is freely given to us. With that having been clarified, the double payment argument from John Owen is Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15515218349376008994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-32139342357470529052010-01-27T03:03:01.150-06:002010-01-27T03:03:01.150-06:00Hi Anonymous,
Thanks for bringing that reference ...Hi Anonymous,<br /><br />Thanks for bringing that reference to my attention. Google books has a preview of that book, so I was able to see that particular page with the argument. I may deal with that in a future post. For now, I think there are some assumptions that need to be brought out. A penal substitutionary view is not equivalent to a commercial view, which makes Christ's death functionTony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-69756932070374077472010-01-26T02:06:31.813-06:002010-01-26T02:06:31.813-06:00I came across the argument below, earlier today in...I came across the argument below, earlier today in a book that I was skimming through in the library. The book overall seems to be very good, but this particular argument reminded me of the Double Payment or Double Jeopardy issue. So I googled it and came to your site. It lays out the argument very well. I think that the God's wrath over the elect issue that you mentioned earlier still hangs Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-77743731165362724642008-03-22T06:17:00.000-05:002008-03-22T06:17:00.000-05:00Relavent Ursinus comments:"Obj. 2. All those ought...<A HREF="http://calvinandcalvinism.com/?p=19" REL="nofollow">Relavent Ursinus comments</A>:<BR/><BR/>"Obj. 2. All those ought to be received into favor for whose offences a sufficient satisfaction has been made. Christ has made a sufficient satisfaction for the offences of all men. Therefore all ought to be received into favor; and if this is not done, God is either unjust to men, or else there Tony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-73321514570858312102008-03-22T06:00:00.000-05:002008-03-22T06:00:00.000-05:00Carl Trueman was asked about the double jeopardy a...<A HREF="http://www.reformation21.org/Upcoming_Issues/Carl_s_Interview/364/" REL="nofollow">Carl Trueman was asked about the double jeopardy argument in an interview on Reformation 21</A>:<BR/><BR/>"Following on from the previous question, it is sometimes argued that the Hodges (Charles and Archibald Alexander) as well R. L. Dabney, did not agree with Owen’s view of “limited atonement,” in Tony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-29159887737848922382007-08-29T17:11:00.000-05:002007-08-29T17:11:00.000-05:00"Obj. 1. If Christ has suffered the penalty of the..."Obj. 1. If Christ has suffered the penalty of the law, not only for the elect, but also for the non-elect, how can it be just that they themselves should be made to suffer it over again forever in hell? <BR/><BR/>Ans. Because Christ did not die with a design to release them from their deserved punishment, but only upon condition of faith; and so they have no right to the release, but upon that Tony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-1169346173090069632007-01-20T20:22:00.000-06:002007-01-20T20:22:00.000-06:00Clifford on Owen’s Triple Choice “Under the influe...Clifford on Owen’s Triple Choice <BR/><BR/>“Under the influence of Aristotle’s teleology and the commercial theory of the atonement, Owen proposes a ‘dilemma to our universalists’ in a powerful piece of reasoning. After stating that there was a qualitative and quantitative ‘sameness’ in the sufferings of Christ and the eternal punishment threatening those for whom he died, Owen affirms, ‘God Tony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-1168272016607516952007-01-08T10:00:00.000-06:002007-01-08T10:00:00.000-06:00One may also want to read my post On Penal Substit...One may also want to read my post <A HREF="http://theologicalmeditations.blogspot.com/2006/12/on-penal-substitution.html" REL="nofollow">On Penal Substitution</A>. I deal with some of the subjects related to the Double Jeopard argument there as well.Tony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-1144114776217468092006-04-03T20:39:00.000-05:002006-04-03T20:39:00.000-05:00Very helpful listing of sources. I am working thro...Very helpful listing of sources. I am working through the issue and you've helpfully pointed me toward answers to the real nub of the issue: can we talk about the non-elect's sins being imputed to Christ.<BR/><BR/>Soli Deo gloriaJMChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04645836696953745685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-1132783681690853842005-11-23T16:08:00.000-06:002005-11-23T16:08:00.000-06:00John Davenant's Reply to the Double Jeopardy Issue...<A HREF="http://theologicalmeditations.blogspot.com/2005/11/john-davenants-reply-to-double.html" REL="nofollow">John Davenant's Reply to the Double Jeopardy Issue</A>Tony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-1132725854071906462005-11-23T00:04:00.000-06:002005-11-23T00:04:00.000-06:00Curt Daniel:8. The Double Payment Argument.A. This...Curt Daniel:<BR/><BR/>8. The Double Payment Argument.<BR/><BR/>A. This is another argument that needs refinement. It can easily be misused by either side. It is summed up in the famous lines from A. M. Toplady's hymn, "Rock of Ages", viz, "Payment cannot God twice demand, First at my bleeding surety's hand, and then again at mine." If Christ paid the debt for al men, then all men must necessarilyTony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-1132724913493438442005-11-22T23:48:00.000-06:002005-11-22T23:48:00.000-06:00Edward Polhill:Object. 4.If Christ died for all me...Edward Polhill:<BR/>Object. 4.<BR/><BR/>If Christ died for all men, then he was a surety for all, and satisfied for the sins of all, and consequently God hath a double satisfaction; one in Christ the surety, and another in the persons of the damned, which is against the nature of his justice. In this argument are two consequences to be weighed. 1. If Christ died for all, then he was a surety for Tony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13948933.post-1132724120735382052005-11-22T23:35:00.000-06:002005-11-22T23:35:00.000-06:00Shedd:"It is objected that it is unjust to exact p...Shedd:<BR/><BR/>"It is objected that it is unjust to exact personal penalty from any individuals of the human race, if a vicarious penalty equal in value to that due from the whole race has been paid to justice. The injustice alleged in this objection may mean injustice toward the individual unbeliever who is personally punished; or it may mean injustice in regard to what the Divine law is Tony Byrnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02102293843397809802noreply@blogger.com