As I've recently pointed out in my new blogpost HERE I'm no longer as confident the doctrine of [Owenian] Limited Atonement as I used to be, despite continuing to be a Calvinist. Here's Calvinist popularizer James White's lecture in defense of Limited Atonement. I've appreciated Dr. White's ministry since the 1990s, so his defense has some weight in my opinion.
In one of James White's Dividing Line broadcasts he mentioned the letter of Cyprian to persecuted Christians sent to mines in the following video starting at around 23 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMSTYKcOh9U&t=1380s
I'm not dogmatic on the extent of the atonement. Here's an articles on John Calvin's view on Limited Atonement. I'm not convinced. I think Calvin was inconsistent and that he generally seemed to affirm universal atonement. My default position is Owenian Limited Atonement that teaches that both the extent and intent of the atonement was particular. But I'm also very open to the mediating position whereby the Extent of the atonement was universal, while the Intent of the atonement was particular.
John Calvin's view of Limited Atonement - by Dr. Roger Nicole https://www.apuritansmind.com/arminianism/john-calvins-view-of-limited-atonement/
See also: John Calvin's Position by Paul Helm https://www.the-highway.com/articleJuly02.html
I first read Martin Luther's The Bondage of the Will [wiki article]
in [circa] 1998. The J.I. Packer and O.R. Johnston translation. Around
2004 I read Catholic theologian Harry McSorley's classic book Luther: Right or Wrong? Which is a review of Luther's book and which, in my opinion, every Protestant should read, along with Luther's Bondage and Erasmus' Freedom. Recently (Jan. 2020) I finally read Erasmus Desiderius' On the Freedom of the Will [wiki article] found in the The Library of Christian Classics edition Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation.
Translated by E. Gordon Rupp. Having finished Erasmus' book, I decided
to re-read Luther's work in the translation offered in the same edition
[translated by Philip S. Watson]. Luther's Bondage was in response to Erasmus' Freedom. Erasmus would latter respond to the Bondage in a two part book Hyperaspistes. However, the Hyperaspistes never gained any popular recognition.
I mention all of the above to preface my recommendation of Luther's Bondage.
I've personally read it, and highly recommend all of my fellow
Protestants read it as well. I realize that the book is by no means
perfect. There are modern theological and philosophical distinctions and
categories which show some of the gaps and weaknesses in Luther's
reasoning [cf. McSorley's book]. Nevertheless, Luther goes a long way in
defending and demonstrating God's sovereign unconditional election on
Scriptural grounds. Even McSorley's book praises much in the work. The Bondage truly is, as has been noted by others, the Reformation's 'Manifesto' on Sola Gratia.
While neither the Packer & Johnston or the Watson translations are
freely available online (being in copyright), Henry Cole's translation
is freely available (being in public domain).
I'm now a Postmillennialist, but I used to be a Premillennialist. As many are fans of Charles Spurgeon [as I am], it would be interesting to know Spurgeon's views on eschatology. Here are some articles on the topic.
NLT read by Stephen Johnston [[[A very loose translation that's more of a paraphrase, so I limit reading/listening to it mostly from the wisdom literature in the Bible like Job; Ps.; Prov.; Eccl.; James]]] https://www.biblestudytools.com/audio-bible/nlt/
