Talk:Unlimited atonement

message: I redirected this page to Atonement; we can change this when there's more to add.  KHM03 14:12, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: The following question was asked (inappropriately) in the text of the article by User:74.195.235.211. I have moved it here for comments.
:(A Request: Would someone who understands the position of unlimited atonement explain in this section what those who hold it specifically believe about what Christ did on the cross so that He is now able to "offer a substitutionary atonement to all"? There's still some confusion on this topic concerning that. Seeing that this position says "He died on behalf of all men" but "does not pay for the penalty for those who deny Him" - it would be very useful. Thanks.)
--Flex (talk|contribs) 15:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: The author indicates that unlimited atonement has been the majority view.  Yet while this might currently be the majority view amongst Christians in the Western world, it seems that the majority of Protestants over the course of church history have maintained the doctrine of limited atonement (Lutherans, Presbyterians, many Baptists, Congregationalists, Reformed Churches, etc.)  And so it seems like the author(s) of this article may be presenting the view to which he, she, or they hold in a way that bolsters unlimited atonement over and against limited atonement.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.145.16.78 (talk) 14:38, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Majority Position? 

message: The article begins by saying that this is the majority doctrine in Protestant Christianity, yet gives no mention of other Christian churches that accept it, most notably the Roman Catholic Church. I propose editing the wording for the sake of inclusiveness and completion. 2607:EA00:104:1C00:69B8:8D15:14AB:23D4 (talk) 16:30, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-Protestant Christian views 

message: At the end of the "Historical background" section of the article there is a broken link and someone has put the text "DEAD LINK" in the article after the broken link.
I'm not sure what should have happened here, but I don't think appending a link with "DEAD LINK" is the correct action.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.58.126 (talk) 16:34, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "DEAD LINK" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Unlimited atonement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141126125213/http://gbgm-umc.org:80/UMhistory/Wesley/sermons/serm-128.stm to http://gbgm-umc.org/umhistory/wesley/sermons/serm-128.stm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I was surprised not to see Hebrews 9:28 quoted either for or against "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. (KJV)" - my emphasis - as this has been a sensitive issue in the wording of modern Eucharistic Prayers. 2A00:23C6:148A:9B01:3194:C94C:9B8A:E216 (talk) 13:00, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hebrews 9:28