Talk:Limitarianism (Christianity)

Proposed paragraph relocation
It is suggested that the paragraph citing R. C. Sproul should be relocated to the article on Limited atonement. However, is the term 'limitarianism' used in the discussion on Limited atonement? If not, relocate the paragraph. However, if the term 'limitarianism' IS used in R. C. Sproul's discussions of Limited atonement, then IMO, the text of the paragraph could be copied and/or rephrased for the article on Limited atonement but its relevance in this article should be noted, and the text (or a version of the text) should be retain in this current article. The purpose of this text citing the use of the term 'limitarianism' as an aspect of teachings on Limited atonement show alternate usage. MaynardClark (talk) 01:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * the paragraph citing Sproul seems worth keeping in the encyclopedia, but does not currently mention the term "limitarianism". Nothing in this article gives any citations for the term at all, nor explains what it is or who believes it. Please clarify and expand this article and add citations, otherwise it should be redirected or deleted. – Fayenatic  L ondon 22:17, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The question is whether the term 'limitarianism' [universal atonement, available (limited ) for the believer] is used in historical discussions of 'Limited Atonement' (which it was), not whether I can find documentation in Sproul's recorded teachings (which is media and often not accepted in Wikipedia) or in his writings.  'Google' for it and find numerous other ONLINE sources (nowhere near 'exhaustive' search of published literature in academic libraries.


 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaynardClark (talk • contribs) 01:11, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Both of those citations explicitly use "limitarian" as a synonym for an advocate of limited atonement. Please either provide citations for your definition "universal atonement, available (limited ) for the believer" or agree to merger and redirection of this page. I have not seen any justification for a separate article. (Please ping me in future replies.) – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:57, 12 July 2022 (UTC)


 * When we 'Google' around, we do find an article, Scacewater T. Did Most Reformers Hold to Unlimited Atonement? Exegetical Tools. December 1, 2016. "We have seen that several interpreters have failed to discern the dualism in these men with respect to the atonement and have wrongly concluded that some of them were limitarians with respect to the objective nature of the atonement." Scacewater claims that several interpreters of the Reformers WRONGLY read them as 'limitarians' (a term he uses) - without naming them, nor did he cite the use of the term in their own writings. IMO proper scholarship MAY require (a) finding and identifying those writers who 'read the Reformers' AS 'limitarians' and locating theological uses of the term 'limitarianism' prior to 2016.  I think that such 'due diligence' should be required, along with (c) a careful search for earlier uses of the term 'limitarian' beyond Scacewater's references before agreeing to merger and redirection (though that may be desirable). MaynardClark (talk) 15:39, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * A 2020 book review of Limited Atonement: Refuted (Paperback March 26, 2020 by Brandon Limpert uses the term 'limitarian'. (a) Since both uses are found in scholarly endeavors, don't you think that even a limited theological use of the term 'limitarianism' justifies some clarification in any article that is titled 'Limitarianism'? (b) Did these purported 'theological limitarians' really advocate theological limitarianism in their understanding of Christ's Atonement, or were they merely scholarly commentators? Either the provision is unlimited and the application limited ['Whosoever will!'] or the provision and the application are unlimited [Universalism] or the provision is Providentially foreknown to be only as effective as WOULD through all future time to be needed BY all future believers' belief and acceptance of the provision [limitarianism - limited atonement].  Is that correct? 3 possible readings? (c) Do you question the ongoing use of the term 'theological limitarianism' as a clarifying tool in such discussions?  How about exegetical work (prior to the historical emergence of The Reformers)   And what of the historical implications of such teaching(s)? MaynardClark (talk)
 * re (a): No, I don't. Use of the term "limitarianism" meaning "advocate of limited atonement" justifies a redirect at the page Limitarianism (Christianity) to Limited atonement, not a separate article. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:22, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm OK with that. One MIGHT suspect that use of a distinct article on one possible interpretation of a doctrine cements that position (in mind) as THE prominent or majority position, which it seems not to be. MaynardClark (talk) 19:51, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Where does the term "Limitarianism" come from? It's not in Sproul. It feels made up. StAnselm (talk) 21:17, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have redirected this to Limited atonement per MaynardClark's agreement. If we could find a reliable source using the term than we could include it there. I see that David Allen uses "limitarian" (to refer to a person holding the view) but not "limitarianism. StAnselm (talk) 21:41, 15 July 2022 (UTC)