Shedd's view presents changes in the Trinity?

"Shedd's material begins on page 278 of volume two. There he says, 'The God-man was a new person.' since Shedd will deny that the man Jesus was a person, this assertion implies certain changes and alterations in the Second Person of the Trinity. Indeed he is a very specific, for on page 281 he adds, 'The Trinity itself is not altered or modified by the Incarnation. Only the Second Person is modified.' Coming from an intelligent and well-educated Christian, this is amazing. The Second Person of the Trinity is as immutable as the other two. Furthermore, if the Second Person suffered alteration, it would modify the Trinity as whole. The Trinity, if I may use the language, is a complex of three Persons. Clearly if one changes, the complex changes. It will have different constituents. Certainly this violates the basic Christian doctrine and destroys all confidence in what may be said of the Incarnation." - Gordon H. Clark, Incarnation, Pg. 47


John Gill kind of reiterates this fact of the incarnation:


"Nor is the unchangeableness of the divine nature to be disproved by the incarnation of Christ; for though he, a divine Person, possessed of the divine nature, was made flesh, or became man; the divine nature in him was not changed into the human nature, nor the human nature into the divine, nor a third nature made out of them both; was this the case, the divine nature would have been changeable; but so it was not; for as it has been commonly said, 'Christ remained what he was, and assumed what he was not;' and what he assumed added nothing to his divine person; he was only manifested in the flesh; he neither received any perfection, nor imperfection, from the human nature; though that received dignity and honour by its union to him, and was adorned with the gifts and graces of the Spirit without measure, and is now advanced at the right hand of God." - John Gill, The Body of Divinity, Pg. 37

The incarnation did not change the Son of God. Nothing was added to Him when he assumed the nature of man.

When four pointers say they are five pointers

"The assertion that because the atonement of Christ is sufficient for all men therefore no men are lost is as absurd as the assertion that because the grain produced in the year 1880 was sufficient to support the life of all men on the globe therefore no men died of starvation during that year. The mere fact that Jesus Christ made satisfaction for human sin, alone and of itself, will save no soul. Christ, conceivably, might have died precisely as he did and his death have been just as valuable for expiatory purposes as it is, but if his death had not been followed with the work of the Holy Spirit and the act of faith on the part of individual men, he would have died in vain. unless his objective work is subjectively appropriated, it is useless so far as personal salvation is concerned." - W.G.T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology



If this is what Calvinist really teach then I do not want it.


"Atonement is unlimited, and redemption is limited. This statement includes all the scriptural texts: those which assert that Christ died for all men, and those which assert that he died for his people." - W.G.T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology


"The difference between the Calvinist and the Arminian appears at this point. Both are evangelical in affirming that salvation is solely by faith in Christ's atoning blood. This differentiates them from the legal Socinian, who denies the doctrine of vicarious atonement and founds salvation from condemnation on personal character and good works. But they differ regarding the origin of faith. The Calvinist maintains that faith is wholly from God, being one of the effects of regeneration; the Arminian, that it is partly from God and partly from man. The Calvinist asserts that a sinner is unconditionally elected to the act of faith and that the Holy Spirit in regeneration inclines and enables him to the act, without cooperation and assistance from him. The Arminiian asserts that a sinner is conditionally elected to the act of faith and that the Holy Spirit works faith in him with some assistance and cooperation from him." - Shedd


Atonement must be distinguished from redemption. The latter term includes the application of the atonement. It is the term redemption, not atonement, that is found in those statements that speak of the work of Christ as limited by the decree of election." - Shedd



It seems as if Shedd is clearly saying that Christ died for all but only his death is applied for a small group of people (The elect). Logically speaking then this makes Shedd a 4 pointer not a 5 pointer.

"Sanctification once begun is never wholly lost. It fluctuates with the fidelity of the believer, but he never falls back into the stupor and death of the unregenerate state..." - W.G.T. Shedd

There is a struggle with sin in the life of the believer. But though he struggles yet he has hope.

I am finding that the older Reformers were not like the neo-reformers such as John Macarthur, R.C. Sproul. The Lordshipers put all their eggs in one basket of works. They become existentialist.