Some of the earliest extant writings of the church, after the apostles, were written by Ignatius of Antioch. Unfortunately very little is known about him. At least not with much certainty.
We can, with reasonable confidence, know that he lived in the first and second centuries during the reign of Trajan (98-117). This is based on the following set of evidence:
- Polycarp, a contemporary of Ignatius, is a recipient of one of the extant letters written by Ignatius. Writing his own Letter to the Philippians, Polycarp mentions Ignatius as a role model (chap 9). With this letter, Polycarp also attaches some of Ignatius’ letters, esteeming them because they explore “faith and patience, and all things that tend to edification in our Lord” (chap 13).
- Irenaeus, writing in the late second century, anonymously quotes a portion of Ignatius’ Letter to the Romans (chap 4) in Ad Haer (V.28.4).
- Origen, writing in the third century, quotes Letter to the Romans (chap 7) and Letter to the Ephesians (chap 19) in two of his commentaries. 
Martyrdom for the Faith
Ignatius is remembered for his courage as he faced martyrdom for his faith in Christ, sometime between 105 and 115 AD. He was arrested, taken into military custody, and taken from Syria across Asia Minor to Rome. In Rome he would be executed, being torn apart by wild beasts. It is on this journey that he wrote the letters that we have in our possession today. Continue reading
This is part 5 of a series of blog posts examining the arguments John Owen makes for and against a limited/particular atonement in his extensive work on the subject: The Death of Death in the Death of Christ.
John Owen was well aware of the arguments against limited atonement regarding the preaching of the gospel. Particularly that the gospel, preached to the non-elect (or reprobate), was vain and useless. Opponents make this claim, Owen rightly admits, because it asks people to believe something that was not true; specifically that Christ died for them.
our adversaries pretending that if Christ died not for all, then in vain are they exhorted to believe, there being, indeed, no proper object for the faith of innumerable, because Christ did not die for them; (Bk IV chap 1)
Preaching to all is not in vain
Owen will argue that “this offer [of the gospel] is neither vain nor fruitless” when presented to those whom Christ did not die for. Why, you might be asking, should I accept Owen’s premise.
And if any ask, What it is of the mind and will of God that is declared and made known when men are commanded to believe for whom Christ did not die?
Owen provides several reasons in answer to the question (his words in italic).
- every man may conclude his own duty, which is to believe in Christ even if it is not God’s purpose to do, or his decree that it should be done
- every man may know the sufficiency of salvation that is in Jesus Christ to all that believe on him
- every man may know the certain, infallible, inviolable connection that is between faith and salvation (or put more simply that salvation is conditioned on faith)
- every man may know that whosoever performs the one [faith] shall surely enjoy the other [salvation]
October 31 will mark the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther hanging the 95 Theses on the doors of the church in Wittenberg to contest the sale of indulgences.
#21 Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who say that a man is absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences.
#37 Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God, even without indulgence letters.
The 95 Theses are considered the spark that ignited the Protestant Reformation. Of course the fire of reformation burned on the early work of Wycliffe, Hus, and others. What made Luther different from the reformers that preceded him? According to Roger Olson (link), “Hus was burned at the stake, largely ending his ministry and movement, and Luther was not.
According to Challies definition, I would not be considered Reformed, as he links the term strongly with the theological points captured in TULIP (link). However, I consider myself so in the sense that I identify with the needed break from the errors of the Roman Catholic Church.
[The Protestant Reformation was a] biblical response to the excesses and perversions of the Roman Catholic Church. The Reformers, having returned to Scripture, attempted to carefully and faithfully rebuild the church upon the teachings of the New Testament.
Here are some posts written over the last few years on the Reformation.