“But to return to Aspasio; I have said already, and still say, I am loath to charge him with flatly opposing the scriptural account of Christ’s death; I am rather disposed to think, that his views of this matter are somewhat unsettled and indistinct, which might occasion his expressing himself inaccurately at times, and who can guard himself against inconsistencies at all times? I presume, he would not venture broadly to contradict the account which Christ himself gives of his own death; and I am encouraged to think so, by his commonly connecting the death of Christ with eternal salvation, so as it should mean the same thing to say, Christ died for any person, and, That person shall be eternally saved. I will, therefore, consider this as a fixed point in the procedure of my controversy with Aspasio” (Sandeman).
Sandeman’s convoluted reasoning seeks to transform a blatant efficacious-atonement-denying heretic into a paragon of orthodoxy. Next Page (5)