TheosGuy

R.L. Dabney in his Systematic Theology draws a distinction between limited atonement and unlimited expiation. As Dabney is a “Five-Point Calvinist” this is a rare distinction from that side of the theological debate.
And since he believes expiation is an unlimited work of Jesus Christ, it is also an intended unlimited work of Christ to provide such.

It seems plain that the vagueness and ambiguity of the modern term ‘atonement,’ has very much complicated the debate. This word, not classical in the Reformed theology, is used sometimes for satisfaction for guilt, sometimes for the reconciliation ensuing thereon; until men on both sides of the debate have forgotten the distinction. The one is cause; the other effect. The only New Testament sense the word atonement has is that of katallage, reconciliation. But expiation is another idea. Katallage is personal. Exilasmos is impersonal. Katallage is multiplied, being repeated as often as a sinner comes to the expiatory blood. Exilasmos is single, unique, complete; and, in itself considered, has no more relation to one man’s sins than another. As it is applied in effectual calling, it becomes personal, and receives a limitation. But in itself, limitation is irrelevant to it. Hence, when men use the word atonement, as they so often do, in the sense of expiation, the phrases, ‘limited atonement,’ ‘particular atonement,’ have no meaning. Redemption is limited, i.e., to true believers, and is particular. Expiation is not limited.¹

1. Dabney, Robert L., Systematic Theology. From chapter 35, Section 8. (2). “Christ’s Satisfaction Not Commercial.”

Tags: Dabney