100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 2 pages.
After reading the section on “Reformation Soteriology” Enns did a good job in general ongiving his readers an understanding in reference to the sections on “Atonement” and “Faith and Works” under the views of Calvinism and Arminian. He gave reader just enough clarification to understand the difference between Calvinism and Arminianism however I think he could have given readers more scriptural references to support each area. In Calvinism under atonement Enns states “Calvin taught that Christ’s death was a particular atonement --- He died only for theelect.” (Enns, 483) In Arminian under atonement Enns states that “Christ’s death in the Arminian view is not a strict equivalent for sin nor a substituted penalty, but a substitute for a penalty.” (Enns, 485) I think that if Enns had given his readers some scriptural references it would have strengthen both of these section. By leaving out scripture that would reinforce each