Miley or Ogen

Dale Winters

Looking for a Systematic Theology from an Arminian perspective.  Any thoughts on what to get?  John Miley's or Thomas Oden?  Thanks for your time.

Blair Laird

Miley's I believe gives you a arminian perspective. Oden is more of a moderatecalvinist

Here is a quote from Miley's

"2. Proof-texts for Universality.—There is one class with the universal terms all and every. “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.”2 Yes, to be testified as a truth, and not to be witnessed against. And the text gives its own testimony. We know not a formula for the better expression of a universal atonement. “For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.”3 If God is not in some similarity of meaning the Saviour of all men, as he is specially the Saviour of believers, there is here a comparison without any basis in analogy. If many are foreordained to eternal destruction, or merely under the preterition of a limited atonement equally dooming them to perdition, God is not in any sense the Saviour of all men. But with a universal atonement, whereby the salvation of all is possible, as that of believers is actual, there is a clear sense in which he is the Saviour of all men, and a sense consistent with the implied analogy of the text.

“But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.”4 Every man is every man. The identity of the two terms of a proposition does not exclude their equivalence. Rather, we have the simple truth that a fact is what it is. And no skill in exegesis can reduce this text to the measure of a limited atonement.

There is another class which affirms the redemption of the world, and in the truest sense of a universal atonement.1 The weakness of all attempts to reduce these texts to the meaning of a limited atonement really concedes their irreducible universality. The attempt requires an identification of the world with the elect. They must have one sense, in that both must mean the same persons. These texts would thus be classed with the proof-texts of limitation, previously considered. World would be one in meaning with the people, sheep, friends, Church, body of Christ. Will it bear such a sense? The exegete has not yet arisen who can answer affirmatively and make good his answer."

 

 

John Miley, Systematic Theology, Volume 2 (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009). 227-28.

Here is Oden

"

 

  God Wills the Salvation of All

 

God primordially willed the salvation of all; the reason that some do not share in his grace must be found in their own self-determining will. Paul included both aspects in his encouragement to Timothy to trust and hope “in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe” (1 Tim. 4:10). It is not the atonement that is limited, but our receptivity to it. Our willingness to allow the Spirit to apply it to us is limited.

 

  Universal Sufficiency Distinguished from Conditional Efficacy

 

As to sufficiency, the cross is for all, for the world. As to efficacy, the cross becomes effective for some, for the faithful. From this derives the distinction of universal sufficiency and conditional efficacy: as to sufficiency it is universal; as to efficacy it is limited to those who accept God’s offer of salvation through Christ.

The Russian Catechism wisely holds these points in tension: “For his part, he offered himself as a sacrifice strictly for all, and obtained for all grace and salvation; but this benefits only those of us who, for their parts, of their own free will, have fellowship in his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death … through a lively and hearty faith, through the Sacraments … and, lastly, through the crucifixion of our flesh with its affections and lusts” (COC II, p. 476). It is by faith that one becomes a partaker in the atoning deed.

 

  As to Sufficiency—“For All,” “For the World”

 

He is a ransom “for all” (1 Tim. 2:6; Barth, CD I/2, pp. 360ff.; IV/3, p. 11), “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men” (Titus 2:11). Even though only some are consciously aware of this salvation, it nonetheless is given for all and sufficient for all, and in some hidden or unknown or eschatological or presently unaware way all are already anticipatively participating in it (2 Cor. 5:14–15; Heb. 2:9; 6:4–6; 1 Cor. 8:11; 2 Pet. 2:1; 3:9). Among Johannine passages that suggest universal sufficiency are John 1:29; 3:16; 6:51; 12:47; and 1 John 2:2.

 

  For the Lost

 

There is a special sense in which the atonement is given for sinners. “For I have come not to call the righteous, but sinners” (Matt. 9:12; cf. Luke 5:32). “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost” (Luke 19:10).

 

  For All Sins

 

In the Thirty-nine Articles the sacrificial death of Christ is defined as the “perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual” (Article XXXI, CC, p. 277). The atonement encompasses all sins whatever, original as well as actual, past and future, great or small, in time or eternity (Titus 2:14; 1 John 1:7; 2:2; Heb. 1:3; Wesley, WJW VIII, pp. 50–58). It further embraces all the penalties of sins (Gal. 3:13; Rom. 5:8–9; Heb. 2:14–15). The satisfaction is rendered, quite simply, for the sin of the world (John 1:20). All punishments are included under the general idea of curse (Gal. 3:13)."

 

 

Thomas C. Oden, The Word of Life : Systematic Theology, Vol. II. (San Francisco, CA: HarperSanFrancisco, 1992). 388-89.

 

They both are pretty similar, but Oden from my understanding is a Moderate Calvinist

Blessings in Christ