Today I was reading in The Supremacy of God in Preaching by John Piper and I ran across the paragraph below. This paragraph really seems to be just a side thought in Piper’s argument, but nonetheless, it caught my attention. Read it for yourself:
It horribly skews the meaning of the cross when contemporary prophets of self-esteem say that the cross is a witness to my infinite worth, since God was willing to pay such a high price to get me. The biblical perspective is that the cross is a witness to the infinite worth of God’s glory, and a witness to the immensity of the sin of my pride. What should shock us is that we have brought such contempt upon the worth of God that the very death of his Son is required to vindicate that worth. The cross stands in witness to the infinite worth of God and the infinite outrage of sin.
On January 28th I posted a youtube video of an excerpt of a sermon by John Piper in which he described the real difference between the Arminian view of atonement (unlimited or universal) and the Calvinistic view of atonement (historically called limited atonement). 
If you were to survey a wide variety of Christians as two which Bible translation they used or which translation they preferred, I am convinced the high majority of the answers you would get would be limited to the King James Version (KJV; also known as the Authorized Version, AV), the New King James Version (NKJV), the NIV (New International Version), the ESV (English Standard Version), the NASB (New American Standard Bible), the New Living Translation (NLT), or even possible the Revised Standard Bible (RSV) or the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB). But one translation that has seemed to slip through the cracks is the American Standard Version (ASV). Interestingly enough, the ASV is actually the basis of three rather well known translations–the RSV (1971), Amplified Bible (1965), and the NASB (1995).
This is a video of what I am assuming is an excerpt from a sermon by John Piper. In this excerpt Piper explains in very understandable language what is in many senses the essential difference between limited atonement (the Calvinistic view) and unlimited/universal atonement (the Arminian view)–two dominant views on the extent of the atonement. He clarifies what, in my opinion, are rather inappropriate terms (limited, unlimited, universal, etc.).
Talking about the film “Courageous,” Andy Naselli stated, “some may embrace moralism and feel good about themselves as they try to earn God’s favor by being good dads. This is not the fault of the film but more a comment about how in our depravity we can be very, very bad by being very, very “good.” We can make an idol out of just about anything—even family.”[
Kirk E. Miller 