Criticising What You Do Not Know!

It is of interest and concern that reformed Christians who appear to know little or nothing about Amyraldianism claim that they do not believe it is a biblical system.  They have not read anything by Amyraut, but their understanding is merely second-hand knowledge?  Even this knowledge proceeds from an inbult prejudice against this servant of God and dedicated disciple of Calvin.  Those professed followers of John Calvin do not seem to know Amyraut was immersed in Calvin's thought; for example, when Amryaut was being tried for heresy by theological extremists at Alencon in 1637, his defense was so full of quotations from John Calvin's work that his accusers realised that were they to condemn Amyraut, they would thereby also be condemning Calvin - which very thing they would not do.  The same is true today; those who condemn Amyraut's theology are simultaneously condemning Calvin's.

The opponents of Amyraut's theology must tell us which part(s) of the Amyraldian/Calvinist theology is unbiblical?  It would also be essential that they inform us of those biblical reference(s) that state(s) that Christ died only for elect sinners.  The Bible must be our point of reference is all these matters.

I challenge anyone reading this post and who opposes Amyraut's theology to  answer these questions.

My advice for what its worth is this: always seek to go to the original sources to ascertain a man's mind on a matter, and do not trust implicitly those who claim to be his supporters and/or opposers.  That is why in my study of the theology of Dr D Martyn Lloyd-Jones I go to his actual words and weigh the statements of his 'friends' in the light of the Doctor's own published statements.  I think that's fair. 

I think we also need to be aware of the negative influence on theology of medieval scholasticism with it watertight systems of logic.  We must concern ourselves with being theological, not logical.  Rev. Eric Alexander told me many years ago that "biblical doctrine must lead to biblical conclusions and not necessarily to logical ones."  Methodologically, this is very good.  Logic is a good servant, but a very bad master.  

I encourage informed comments on this piece, comments that are not just designed to score a point or two, but which are intent rather on growing in grace and in knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.