Does God hate the reprobate?

cygnusx1 · Aug 21, 2005

you may care to reflect on this page , it is quite long , but helpful I believe.

http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:LzLJ9cESTqcJublic.csusm.edu/public/guests/rsclark/Free_Offer.html+ezekiel+18:23+calvin&hl=en http://www.fpcr.org/blue_banner_articles/Murray-Free-Offer-Review.htm

The problem is when we seek rationalism as the bar of truth instead of Revelation , both Hypers and Open Theists are Rationalists.

Elect · Aug 21, 2005

cygnusx1 said:
you may care to reflect on this page , it is quite long , but helpful I believe.

http://public.csusm.edu/public/guests/rsclark/Free_Offer.html

The problem is when we seek rationalism as the bar of truth instead of Revelation , both Hypers and Open Theists are Rationalists.

Thanks and I agree!

Rationalism comes from the human mind, which is flawed!

cygnusx1 · Aug 21, 2005

Arthur Pink's early writings reflected the highest of high-Calvinist opinion. Some have suggested that Pink was flirting with (or even embraced) a kind of hyper-Calvinism. Certain hyper-Calvinist tendencies certainly marred some of his earlier works. For example, Pink's well-known and mostly helpful book on the sovereignty of God originally included material (later edited out of the Banner of Truth edition) denying that God loves all His creaturesparticularly the reprobate. According to Pink, God's hatred for non-elect sinners allows for no disposition toward them that can properly be called "love."

Pink's denial of the love of God toward the reprobate set him at odds with Calvin, Flavel, Charnock, Manton, and most of the Puritans. But in Pink's later ministry, he encountered a virulent strain of hyper-Calvinism, promoted by the "Gospel Standard" churches in England. The Gospel Standard articles of faith deny that it is the duty of every sinner to repent and believe in Christ.

In the article below, Pink argues against the "Gospel Standard" error, pointing out that if God commands all sinners to repent and believe in Christ, then faith is their duty and unbelief is a sin. In support of this position Pink cites many writers who, ironically, would have differed with Pink on the love of God for the non-elect. (One is tempted to point out that if the more mature Pink had simply reexamined his own position on God's love in the same way he urged his readers to evaluate the "duty-faith" controversyby Scripture, not bare "reason"; and by considering the wisdom of our Puritan forebearsPink himself might have abandoned his insistence that God's demeanor toward the reprobate must be utterly devoid of any kind of love.) Notice also that Pink, quoting Calvin, affirms an important truth denied by many later Twentieth-Century hyper-Calvinists: that divine mercy is offered to all, indiscriminately, in the gospel.

Phil Johnson

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/dutyfth.htm

Rick Otto · Aug 21, 2005

I don't see where in scripture, mercy(salvific) is offered at all!
In scripture, I only see it GIVEN. I see it asked for, but never OFFERED.
The gift is given, not offered.
The "offer" idea I have only heard from the mouths of Pelagians/Armenians.
It is the way they introduce "free" will & make salvation a human choice.

cygnusx1 · Aug 21, 2005

Rick Otto said:
I don't see where in scripture, mercy(salvific) is offered at all!
In scripture, I only see it GIVEN. I see it asked for, but never OFFERED.
The gift is given, not offered.
The "offer" idea I have only heard from the mouths of Pelagians/Armenians.
It is the way they introduce "free" will & make salvation a human choice.

I don't wish to get bogged down in an arguement over the word "offer" , it isn't my fav word by a long stretch , however , the meaning behind the concept of God Offering salvation to men indiscrimiately has been held by Calvinists for centuries ....... maybe if you would take a look at some quotes , these are all by Calvinist's .........

http://www.christianforums.com/t1420547-calvinists-and-the-gospel-and-evangelism-.html

Jon_ · Aug 21, 2005

cygnusx1 said:
''In like manner, we must turn from the vain reasonings (as in the above Articles of Faith) of the hyper-Calvinist, and while holding fast to the total depravity and the spiritual inability of the natural man, we must also believe in his moral responsibility and accountability to God. It is the bounden duty of God's servants to tell the unregenerate that the reason why they cannot repent evangelically is because their hearts are so wedded to their lusts; that the reason why they cannot come to Christ is because their sins have fettered and chained them; that the reason why they hate the Light is because they love the darkness. But so far from this excusing them, it only adds to their guilt; that so far from rendering them objects of pity it exposes them as doubly deserving of damnation. It is the preacher's business to show wherein spiritual inability consists: not in the lack of soul faculties, but in the absence of any love for Him who is infinitely lovely. Far be it from us to extenuate the wicked unbelief of the unregenerate!

So the Gospel, when delivered to the reprobate, becomes not a message of hope, but a message of condemnation? Does it not then become another Gospel? What is so "good" about news of damnation?

cygnusx1 said:
The compilers of the above Articles of Faith were very largely influenced by a piece written by William Huntington in 1791, "Excommunication: and the Duty of all men to believe weighed in the balance." We have space to quote only one paragraph: "When Peter said, 'Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out' (Acts 3:19), He that is exalted to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins, sent His Spirit and Grace with the Word to work repentance and conversion in His own elect. And though they spoke the Word, promiscuously to all, yet He only spake it to His own. It was sent with the power of the Spirit. It never was sent with the Spirit of Faith to any but His own: 'When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the Word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed' (Acts 13:48). This is the life-giving commandment of the everlasting God, in the mouth of Zion's King. But what effect has it, or what power attends it, from the mouth of Mr. Ryland or the mouth of Mr. Fuller, when they make it the rule of a dead man's duty? Just as much as the adjuration of the sons of Sceva the Jew, when they abused the name of the Lord Jesus in commanding the spirit, who left the man and mastered them; and so these labour for the unconverted till they get into the gall of bitterness themselves. . . . Ye might just as well go to the gates of the grave and tell the sleeping dust it is their duty to come forth as Lazarus did. Mr. Ryland may just as well do the one as the other."

This all seems sound to me.

cygnusx1 said:
What a confused jumble is that! Confounding the Word of Power (Heb. 1:3) on the lips of Christ, with the Word of Reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:18, 19) in the mouths of His servants. What the Lord does, is none of our business. The commission He has given His servants is to preach the Gospel to every creature, and they certainly have not fully obeyed until they bid their hearers "Repent ye, and believe the Gospel" (Mark 1:15). Whom God quickens, is His own affair; ours is to faithfully warn the unsaved, to show wherein their sins consists (enmity against God), to bid them to throw down the weapons of their warfare against Him, to call upon them to repent (Acts 17:30), to proclaim the One who receives all who come to Him in faith. In allowing that Peter "spoke the Word promiscuously to all" Mr. Huntington pulled down what he laboured so hard to build up.

Again, nothing to disagree with. I never said that we should not preach the Gospel to all men. That is being read into what I said. What I said is that the Gospel offer is not a genuine offer to the reprobate. Who are the reprobate? We don't know. Neither do we know the elect; therefore, we are charged with delivering the Gospel to all men everywhere, for none of us know the work of our Father.

cygnusx1 said:
To affirm that the ministry of the Apostles (recorded in the Acts) furnishes no precedent for God's servants today, is as foolish, as "inconsistent," and unwarrantable, as it would be to say that Acts 6 supplies no present rule for deacons to be governed by! The physical condition of those in the cemetery is vastly different from the moral state of the unregenerate still upon the earth. The former cannot sin, cannot reject Christ; the latter can and do. The former cannot read their Bibles or call upon God for mercy; the latter should! It is because the natural man possesses the same faculties of soul as does the regenerate that he is an accountable creature, responsible to use them for God instead of against Him''.A.W.P.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/dutyfth.htm

Again, agreed. I think what I said was miscontrued for this to be issued in response to it.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

cygnusx1 · Aug 21, 2005

Jon_ said:
Jon_ said:

So the Gospel, when delivered to the reprobate, becomes not a message of hope, but a message of condemnation? Does it not then become another Gospel? What is so "good" about news of damnation?

Click to expand...

I don't think the Gospel is anything other than Good News to all sinners until they trample it under foot .......

Again, nothing to disagree with. I never said that we should not preach the Gospel to all men.

Click to expand...

Jon , I never said you didn't , in fact I don't recall quoting you at all ...... until now.

That is being read into what I said. What I said is that the Gospel offer is not a genuine offer to the reprobate.

Click to expand...

Of course it is a genuine offer ....... there are only Two Calvinistic Creeds/Church's I know of who deny the Gospel offer .... all the others accept it .AFAIK

Who are the reprobate? We don't know. Neither do we know the elect; therefore, we are charged with delivering the Gospel to all men everywhere, for none of us know the work of our Father.

Click to expand...

Yes , but we command all men by the Authority of God to Repent and to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and they are promised (offered) that if they obey the truth they will never perish!
Certainly the Gospel is much more than presenting facts to the lost , it is CALLING upon them to act ..... with the threat of death and the promise of Life if they comply ..... certainly this is also an evidence of God's Love to mankind , that despite the fact of Reprobation man is given a genuine opportunity to repent .More so , he is given very good reasons why continuing in sin is foolish and turning back to God is to his advantage , the motivation for faith and repentance is both fear and Love ....

Again, agreed. I think what I said was miscontrued for this to be issued in response to it.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Click to expand...

I am sorry Jon if you felt I had misconstrued you .........

yet you did say:

''The offer of the Gospel is limited to God's elect, just as Christ's atoning sacrifice is limited to the elect.''

"God does not offer mercy to the reprobate".

"Indeed, without the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, the Gospel would not be a genuine offer".

''If God were to extend the offer of salvation knowing that no one would accept its terms that would be not be a genuine offering of salvation.''

''The Gospel is not offered to corpses. It is quite too late for a corpse to accept an offer of life.''

''Therefore, the Gospel message is intended solely for the regenerate.''

all of which are Hyper Calvinistic ideas not the Reformed Faith.

Jon_ · Aug 21, 2005

cygnusx1 said:
I don't think the Gospel is anything other than Good News to all sinners until they trample it under foot .......

Pink seems to think otherwise:

A.W. Pink said:
It is the bounden duty of God's servants to tell the unregenerate that the reason why they cannot repent evangelically is because their hearts are so wedded to their lusts; that the reason why they cannot come to Christ is because their sins have fettered and chained them; that the reason why they hate the Light is because they love the darkness. But so far from this excusing them, it only adds to their guilt; that so far from rendering them objects of pity it exposes them as doubly deserving of damnation.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding him myself, but he seems to rationalize that the reason we evangelize the unrepentant is because it adds to their guilt. That morphs the Gospel from a message of good news to a message of condemnation. This is a further reason why it is accurate to say the Gospel offer is not extended to the unrepentant. Because it is not an offer or hope and redemption to them--it is only a promise of judgment.

cygnusx1 said:
Jon , I never said you didn't , in fact I don't recall quoting you at all ...... until now.

Maybe I read more into your post than I should have, then. I thought it was in response to what I had said about the Gospel not being a genuine offer to the reprobate.

cygnusx1 said:
Of course it is a genuine offer ....... there are only Two Calvinistic Creeds/Church's I know of who deny the Gospel offer .... all the others accept it .AFAIK

It is illogical to say that the Gospel is genuinely offered to those who are incapable of accepting it. In the first part, you and I both readily acknowledge that men are spiritual corpses and have no spiritual faculties whatsoever. Because the words of life are spiritual in nature, the unregenerate do not hear them. More than not being a genuine offer, the reprobate never even hear the Gospel call. They hear only condemnation.

In the second part, because God has willed that the reprobate should be left to their evil devices, if he were to genuinely offer the Gospel to them and desire that they accept it, he would be caught in a dichotomy. In the one hand, he is pleased that they should be left to their wickedness. In the other hand, he is pleased to offer them to the Gospel that they should receive it. This is contradictory. Either God is desirous that they believe in his Son and thus makes this effectual (regeneration) or he does not (reprobation). This is the same error that the Arminian makes in saying that God desires everyone to believe, but to believe from their own power (which they do not have). (Well, one distiction is that the Arminian does not accept the total inability of total depravity.)

Arguing that God both desires that reprobates be condemned and that they accept the Gospel amounts to a contradiction.

cygnusx1 said:
Yes , but we command all men by the Authority of God to Repent and to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and they are promised (offered) that if they obey the truth they will never perish!

That's right, but only the regenerate will ever hear that message.

cygnusx1 said:
Certainly the Gospel is much more than presenting facts to the lost , it is CALLING upon them to act .....

I'm unsure of the point you are trying to make here, viz. the distinction between arguing the facts of the Gospel (i.e. the truth) and "calling upon them to act." If we argue the truth of the Gospel we call upon them to act. The two are synonymous. There is no mystical counterpoint in the message or additional benefit besides the redemption that it accomplishes.

cygnusx1 said:
with the threat of death and the promise of Life if they comply ..... certainly this is also an evidence of God's Love to mankind , that despite the fact of Reprobation man is given a genuine opportunity to repent.

This would be evidence of God's cruelty, not his love, were he to offer dead men the chance to live. As it is impossible for the reprobate to ever hear or accept the Gospel it would be a mockery to offer it to them.

Would you evangelize Satan and his demons? Are not the reprobate the children of the devil?

cygnusx1 said:
More so , he is given very good reasons why continuing in sin is foolish and turning back to God is to his advantage , the motivation for faith and repentance is both fear and Love ....

The wicked hate God and have no fear of him in their hearts.

cygnusx1 said:
I am sorry Jon if you felt I had misconstrued you .........

cygnusx1 said:
yet you did say:

''The offer of the Gospel is limited to God's elect, just as Christ's atoning sacrifice is limited to the elect.''

"God does not offer mercy to the reprobate".

"Indeed, without the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, the Gospel would not be a genuine offer".

''If God were to extend the offer of salvation knowing that no one would accept its terms that would be not be a genuine offering of salvation.''

''The Gospel is not offered to corpses. It is quite too late for a corpse to accept an offer of life.''

''Therefore, the Gospel message is intended solely for the regenerate.''

all of which are Hyper Calvinistic ideas not the Reformed Faith.

I take issue the the hyper-Calvinistic label that is being applied to me here. The doctrine of hyper-Calvinism says that we should not evangelize the heathen because God will save them in his own time. Moreover, the doctrine further asserts that the number of the elect is limited. Hyper-Calvinism asserts that we should not spread the Gospel at all, which is an outrage to the Word of God and something that I detest.

The Great Commission is entirely in effect and we as Christians are called to spread the message throughout the world, to all men indiscriminately. However, our presentation of the Gospel is effective only in its personal obedience to God. We do not bring forth any changes in the nature of men, the work is all God's.

And as I have argued, God does not change the hearts of the reprobate. He does not regenerate them, as he has eternally purposed them to hellfire. The Gospel message falls dead upon their ears. The offer of life is useless to a corpse--he is already dead.

John H. Gerstner had a excellent illustration of the dynamics. If everyone is assembled in church and the pastor calls out that license number such and such has its lights on, then that message is meaningless to all but one person in the congregation. While everyone hears the outward call of the annoucement, all but one know it is inapplicable. Such is how the Gospel sounds to the ears of the unregenerate. They hear its outward offer of hope and mercy, but inwardly only hear condemnation and judgment, and for this reason they despise it and know it is not extended to them. And they are correct. Until they are reborn through the efficacious work of the Holy Spirit, the Gospel is meaningless to them and they will never accept it.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

cygnusx1 · Aug 21, 2005

Jon_ said:
Jon_ said:

Pink seems to think otherwise:

Click to expand...

maybe .... but overall Pink was against the Gospel Standard Baptists for their three point denial of Duty Faith ......

Perhaps I am misunderstanding him myself, but he seems to rationalize that the reason we evangelize the unrepentant is because it adds to their guilt.

Click to expand...

I struggled for a number of years with that one .......... until the Lord was pleased to unlock the door .....

That morphs the Gospel from a message of good news to a message of condemnation.

Click to expand...

It would do if it were true .......

This is a further reason why it is accurate to say the Gospel offer is not extended to the unrepentant. Because it is not an offer or hope and redemption to them--it is only a promise of judgment.

Click to expand...

I don't agree , the Offer is free , God is quite able to make good all His promises , the reason that they don't respond to the Good News is their own depravity ..... they hate God.

Maybe I read more into your post than I should have, then. I thought it was in response to what I had said about the Gospel not being a genuine offer to the reprobate.

It is illogical to say that the Gospel is genuinely offered to those who are incapable of accepting it.

Click to expand...

It is not illogical at all ............ it is just not a simple logic , like 'either' - 'or' ...

In the first part, you and I both readily acknowledge that men are spiritual corpses and have no spiritual faculties whatsoever. Because the words of life are spiritual in nature, the unregenerate do not hear them. More than not being a genuine offer, the reprobate never even hear the Gospel call. They hear only condemnation.

Click to expand...

This is where we really do need to seek clarity ........ sinners do hear the gospel ....... OK they don't hear with the mind of Christ , they hear with the mind of Adam ....... but they hear!
And what is more they don't like what they hear!

In the second part, because God has willed that the reprobate should be left to their evil devices, if he were to genuinely offer the Gospel to them and desire that they accept it, he would be caught in a dichotomy. In the one hand, he is pleased that they should be left to their wickedness. In the other hand, he is pleased to offer them to the Gospel that they should receive it. This is contradictory.

Click to expand...

Not contradictory at all , consider the point that you have this day had multiple desires , each in turn taking priority , to the outsider , he could quite easily mistake your choice of food this day as a "hatred" for some other choice ....... but he could be drawing conclusions wrongly

Either God is desirous that they believe in his Son and thus makes this effectual (regeneration) or he does not (reprobation).

Click to expand...

Both!

This is the same error that the Arminian makes in saying that God desires everyone to believe, but to believe from their own power (which they do not have). (Well, one distiction is that the Arminian does not accept the total inability of total depravity.)

Click to expand...

On the contrary .......... the Arminian and the Hyper calvinist both make the same mistake in trusting in rationalism ...... the Arminian says "God cannot command the sinner to Repent if the sinner is dead in trespasses and sins"
and the HC , says God cannot desire the sinner Repents if He has a decree that He dies........ both are wrong!

Arguing that God both desires that reprobates be condemned and that they accept the Gospel amounts to a contradiction.

Click to expand...

No , a paradox!

That's right, but only the regenerate will ever hear that message.

I'm unsure of the point you are trying to make here, viz. the distinction between arguing the facts of the Gospel (i.e. the truth) and "calling upon them to act." If we argue the truth of the Gospel we call upon them to act. The two are synonymous. There is no mystical counterpoint in the message or additional benefit besides the redemption that it accomplishes.

This would be evidence of God's cruelty, not his love, were he to offer dead men the chance to live. As it is impossible for the reprobate to ever hear or accept the Gospel it would be a mockery to offer it to them.

Click to expand...

that is precisely how the Arminian argues ......... but God can do all things and if God can command that which He does not decree and visa versa , then God is not engaging in mockery at all.

Would you evangelize Satan and his demons?

Click to expand...

If God commanded it yes!

Are not the reprobate the children of the devil?

Click to expand...

sure , and such were we , we were held captive and we were like others children of wrath.

The wicked hate God and have no fear of him in their hearts.

Click to expand...

neither do the Elect unless God is pleased to place that fear in their hearts.

I take issue the the hyper-Calvinistic label that is being applied to me here. The doctrine of hyper-Calvinism says that we should not evangelize the heathen because God will save them in his own time.

Click to expand...

He says much more than that , he denies that there is a duty placed upon all men to believe God's Gospel!

Moreover, the doctrine further asserts that the number of the elect is limited. Hyper-Calvinism asserts that we should not spread the Gospel at all, which is an outrage to the Word of God and something that I detest.

Click to expand...

That is true in part , they also deny God has anything for the world except damnation ........ the elect are concieved as being not of this world...

The Great Commission is entirely in effect and we as Christians are called to spread the message throughout the world, to all men indiscriminately. However, our presentation of the Gospel is effective only in its personal obedience to God. We do not bring forth any changes in the nature of men, the work is all God's.

Click to expand...

agreed , just what is the "Good News" Jon?
I mean what exactly do we tell sinners?

And as I have argued, God does not change the hearts of the reprobate. He does not regenerate them, as he has eternally purposed them to hellfire. The Gospel message falls dead upon their ears. The offer of life is useless to a corpse--he is already dead.

Click to expand...

True , but not useless , it serves at least two purposes .

John H. Gerstner had a excellent illustration of the dynamics. If everyone is assembled in church and the pastor calls out that license number such and such has its lights on, then that message is meaningless to all but one person in the congregation. While everyone hears the outward call of the annoucement, all but one know it is inapplicable. Such is how the Gospel sounds to the ears of the unregenerate. They hear its outward offer of hope and mercy, but inwardly only hear condemnation and judgment, and for this reason they despise it and know it is not extended to them. And they are correct. Until they are reborn through the efficacious work of the Holy Spirit, the Gospel is meaningless to them and they will never accept it.
Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Click to expand...

True !
Yet take some time to consider just why it is that God will show greater wrath on those who rejected The Gospel , rejected jesus , and resisted God's Spirit .

God is dealing with each human in a variety of ways , Love being one of them.

Elect · Aug 21, 2005

The longer I study the hatred of God toward the reprobate the more I see it to be so. As much as I want to see God loving everyone even if it is to a lesser degree, the truth is more important to me.

I don't see two levels of God's love. A love that saves and a love that does not. Rather I see a love from God that is directed toward His people that never fails and that is from everlasting to everlasting. A love that redeems a chosen people, a love that moves the heart of God and that does not change and is unconditional. A love that is only found in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Anyone that is not in Christ does not have access to this love and has no hope. The wicked have the wrath of God abiding on them and God is angry with them everyday. The wicked will melt like wax and will spent eternity in a the Lake of Fire. There does not seemed to be any love passing from Creator to sinners or from sinner to Creator from those that are in this state.

The Holy Scriptures do use the word hate. God hates all doers of iniquity, He abhors those that love violence. Esau have I hated. this is all taken from Scriptures and there are others.

I am no Greek and Hebrew scholar, but hate does seem to be the right translation.

If I have seemed indecisive in this thread, it's because I have been. This post has committed me to a side.

Thanks for all the input!

Jon_ · Aug 21, 2005

cygnusx1 said:
It is not illogical at all ............ it is just not a simple logic , like 'either' - 'or' ...

All logic can be reduced to a simple "either," or "or." All deductions can be expressed in a syllogism. If not, then it is not deductively valid, which makes it illogical. Care to express your position in a syllogism?

cygnusx1 said:
This is where we really do need to seek clarity ........ sinners do hear the gospel ....... OK they don't hear with the mind of Christ , they hear with the mind of Adam ....... but they hear!

cygnusx1 said:
And what is more they don't like what they hear!

They do not hear the intergral content of the message. They do not hear, "Repent and believe on Jesus Christ and you will be saved!" They hear, "You have to believe in an invisble man OR YOU WILL BURN IN HELL!" Ask any atheist. He'll tell you that's what the Gospel amounts to him.

cygnusx1 said:
Not contradictory at all , consider the point that you have this day had multiple desires , each in turn taking priority , to the outsider , he could quite easily mistake your choice of food this day as a "hatred" for some other choice ....... but he could be drawing conclusions wrongly

You've tripped up, cyggy. God does not change. His desires do not change. He is immutable. Moreover, because he is omnipotent, his desires are eternally efficacious. If he desires that the reprobate burn, he cannot contradict himself by desiring that they be saved.

cygnusx1 said:
Both!

Utterly illogical and nonsensical.

cygnusx1 said:
On the contrary .......... the Arminian and the Hyper calvinist both make the same mistake in trusting in rationalism ...... the Arminian says "God cannot command the sinner to Repent if the sinner is dead in trespasses and sins"

cygnusx1 said:
and the HC , says God cannot desire the sinner Repents if He has a decree that He dies........ both are wrong!

So you admit that you adhere to an illogical view of Scripture? That's what your statement amounts to me. You are saying that Arminians and hyper-Calvinists trust in rationalism (deductive reasoning), thereby implying that you do not.

cygnusx1 said:
No , a paradox!

A paradox is an apparent contradiction that is actually not a contradiction. Unless you can show how this is noncontradictory, it is completely baseless to label this a paradox.

cygnusx1 said:
that is precisely how the Arminian argues ......... but God can do all things and if God can command that which He does not decree and visa versa , then God is not engaging in mockery at all.

cygnusx1 said:
If God commanded it yes!

And yet God does not command the regeneration of the reprobate, so we're back to where we started: with God mocking them with the impossibility of eternal life.

cygnusx1 said:
sure , and such were we , we were held captive and we were like others children of wrath.

Indeed, until God, in his infinite love, grace, and mercy, regenerated us and gave us the gift of salvific faith in his Son forever and ever. Amen.

cygnusx1 said:
neither do the Elect unless God is pleased to place that fear in their hearts.

Yes. And for them the Gospel is an authentic and efficacious call. Not so for the reprobate.

cygnusx1 said:
agreed , just what is the "Good News" Jon?

cygnusx1 said:
I mean what exactly do we tell sinners?

That they are sinners. And that Jesus Christ has died to save that which was lost. And if they will acknowledge their sins, hear his voice, and believe on him as Lord and Savior, they shall be saved.

cygnusx1 said:
True , but not useless , it serves at least two purposes.

Which would be?

cygnusx1 said:
Yet take some time to consider just why it is that God will show greater wrath on those who rejected The Gospel , rejected jesus , and resisted God's Spirit.

Because he is pleased to do so.

cygnusx1 said:
God is dealing with each human in a variety of ways , Love being one of them.

Absolutely. God certainly does love all of mankind, but not all in the same sense. He showers them with lovingkindnesses, such as those articulated by our Lord in Matt. 5:45. Nevertheless, those who are not his children are objects of his wrath, and his soul hates the wicked. To his elect alone does he show salvific love.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

cygnusx1 · Aug 22, 2005

Jon_ said:
Jon_ said:

All logic can be reduced to a simple "either," or "or." All deductions can be expressed in a syllogism. If not, then it is not deductively valid, which makes it illogical. Care to express your position in a syllogism?

Click to expand...

Is Christ God or man ? Flesh or Spirit ?
Is God Three or One?

They do not hear the intergral content of the message. They do not hear, "Repent and believe on Jesus Christ and you will be saved!" They hear, "You have to believe in an invisble man OR YOU WILL BURN IN HELL!" Ask any atheist. He'll tell you that's what the Gospel amounts to him.

Click to expand...

I agree , yet the message is still pure ......... and they still take God's tempoary Love gift's daily !

You've tripped up, cyggy. God does not change. His desires do not change. He is immutable. Moreover, because he is omnipotent, his desires are eternally efficacious. If he desires that the reprobate burn, he cannot contradict himself by desiring that they be saved.

Click to expand...

I never said God's desires change ....... what I am driving at is MULTIPLE desires ..... if you saw a really close friend betray you , would you not have Diverse desires ?

Utterly illogical and nonsensical.

Click to expand...

I used to think that way too .........

So you admit that you adhere to an illogical view of Scripture? That's what your statement amounts to me. You are saying that Arminians and hyper-Calvinists trust in rationalism (deductive reasoning), thereby implying that you do not.

Click to expand...

Thereby implying that Thousands of Calvinists's do not!
What do the Calvinist Confessions (Westminster Confession of faith) say about a Genuine offer to the reprobate ?

A paradox is an apparent contradiction that is actually not a contradiction. Unless you can show how this is noncontradictory, it is completely baseless to label this a paradox.

Click to expand...

Yes , that is why I believe it is a paradox , and NOT a contradiction ... if God decrees all things He even decrees the 'Free' actions of men ....

And yet God does not command the regeneration of the reprobate,

Click to expand...

Does He not ........... ''Cast away from you all your transgressions, in which you have transgressed; and make yourself a new heart and a new spirit: for why will you die, house of Israel''? Ez 18:31

Indeed, until God, in his infinite love, grace, and mercy, regenerated us and gave us the gift of salvific faith in his Son forever and ever. Amen.

Click to expand...

Saving Grace makes all the difference , yet only the Elect are visited with irresistable Grace ........ the rest Resist .
Just what exactly are the reprobate resisting ? see Acts 7:51
"You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit! As your fathers did, so you do."

Yes. And for them the Gospel is an authentic and efficacious call. Not so for the reprobate.

Click to expand...

Efficacious no ........... authentic YES!

That they are sinners. And that Jesus Christ has died to save that which was lost. And if they will acknowledge their sins, hear his voice, and believe on him as Lord and Savior, they shall be saved.

Click to expand...

"there is ample evidence to show that , in our preaching , we are not only to call men to repentance and faith , but we are to offer them salvation if they should do so. Our commission is not merely to preach repentance , but "repentance and remission of sins" (Luke 24:47) This was the message of the Apostles" K.W.Stebbins

Which would be?

Click to expand...

Love and exposure ...........

Because he is pleased to do so.

Click to expand...

that is no answer ........... howabout greater light increases responsibility/accountability !

Absolutely. God certainly does love all of mankind, but not all in the same sense. He showers them with lovingkindnesses, such as those articulated by our Lord in Matt. 5:45. Nevertheless, those who are not his children are objects of his wrath, and his soul hates the wicked. To his elect alone does he show salvific love.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Click to expand...

we agree , God does Love all mankind , but NoT in the same way!

Jon_ · Aug 22, 2005

Let's simplify the discussion a bit, shall we?

(Ps. 115:3 AV) But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.

According to the Psalmist, whatever God pleases, that he does. If God desired the salvation of the reprobate, he would do it. As the reprobate are not saved, God does not desire it. This is undeniably sound logic and exegesis. Arguing otherwise is unscriptural and illogical.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Jon_ · Aug 22, 2005

cygnusx1 said:
Thereby implying that Thousands of Calvinists's do not!

cygnusx1 said:
What do the Calvinist Confessions (Westminster Confession of faith) say about a Genuine offer to the reprobate ?

You assert that the Westminster divines did not teach this doctrine, yet I cannot find in the Confession where they have denied it. At most, they appear to be silent on the Gospel's affect on the reprobate.

Here is what I found of relevance to the subject:

. . . Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only (3:6).

The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as He pleaseth, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath, for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice (3:7).

All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, He is pleased in His appointed and accepted time effectually to call, by His Word and Spirit (10:1 emphasis mine).

Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word (cf. Matt. 22:14), and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved . . . (10:4).

And I will again make it clear that I never denied the Gospel is preached to the reprobate. I never denied that our duty to preach the Gospel should conflict with the secret counsel of God's election. As God's elect are secret and hidden from us until such time that he should reveal them, we are not to deny the Gospel message to anyone and to spread it without prejudice. This is what is meant by "although they may be called by the ministry of the Word." As Jesus said in Matt 22:14,

For many are called, but few are chosen (AV).

All are called to believe on the name of Jesus Christ and be saved outwardly; yet, this not being an effectual call, has no authenticity for those who would not hear the Word. Even more, as dead men have no ears to hear and the inability by which to choose, they could, nonetheless, never perceive and receive that message. And unless God desired their repentance, he would not genuinely offer them such, for God is pleased that they should suffer in and for their sins.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

cygnusx1 · Aug 22, 2005

Jon_ said:
Let's simplify the discussion a bit, shall we?
(Ps. 115:3 AV) But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.

According to the Psalmist, whatever God pleases, that he does. If God desired the salvation of the reprobate, he would do it. As the reprobate are not saved, God does not desire it. This is undeniably sound logic and exegesis. Arguing otherwise is unscriptural and illogical.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Does God desire you to be Perfect?

cygnusx1 · Aug 22, 2005

Jon_ said:
You assert that the Westminster divines did not teach this doctrine, yet I cannot find in the Confession where they have denied it. At most, they appear to be silent on the Gospel's affect on the reprobate.

Here is what I found of relevance to the subject:
. . . Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only (3:6).

The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as He pleaseth, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath, for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice (3:7).

All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, He is pleased in His appointed and accepted time effectually to call, by His Word and Spirit (10:1 emphasis mine).

Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word (cf. Matt. 22:14), and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved . . . (10:4).

And I will again make it clear that I never denied the Gospel is preached to the reprobate. I never denied that our duty to preach the Gospel should conflict with the secret counsel of God's election. As God's elect are secret and hidden from us until such time that he should reveal them, we are not to deny the Gospel message to anyone and to spread it without prejudice. This is what is meant by "although they may be called by the ministry of the Word." As Jesus said in Matt 22:14,
For many are called, but few are chosen (AV).

All are called to believe on the name of Jesus Christ and be saved outwardly; yet, this not being an effectual call, has no authenticity for those who would not hear the Word. Even more, as dead men have no ears to hear and the inability by which to choose, they could, nonetheless, never perceive and receive that message. And unless God desired their repentance, he would not genuinely offer them such, for God is pleased that they should suffer in and for their sins.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

first of all Jon , no-one has said you don't believe in preaching the Gospel to all , the issue is regarding what is meant by it (preaching the Gospel to all)
ie , to the Genuiness of the "offer"

this quote may help ...........

6. The Westminster Standards

The term "offer" or "free offer" is used in the Westminster Standards (Westminster Confession of Faith VII/III; Larger Catechism Ans. 32, 63, 68; Shorter Catechism Ans. 31 and 86).

The Larger Catechism puts it beyond doubt that the term is used in reference to non-elect persons; "...who, for their wilful neglect and contempt of grace offered to them, being justly left in their unbelief, do never truly come to Jesus Christ" (Larger Catechism Ans. 68).

Jon_ · Aug 22, 2005

cygnusx1 said:
Does God desire you to be Perfect?

God requires perfection of us because his divine justice demands it. God cannot justify wicked deeds. Nonetheless, I am made perfect in Christ, and wholly justified before the Father.

Indeed, Christ commanded that I be perfect even as my heavenly Father is perfect. Yet, the Lord is still pleased (desirous) that I should, on occasion, fall, that his infinite grace and mercy should be greater known through my inability to maintain an infallible walk; and that I should come to greater dependence in him.

Perfection is a requirement under God's moral law. God's law is still in effect, which is why he told us to be perfect as his Father is perfect.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

cygnusx1 · Aug 22, 2005

Jon_ said:
God requires perfection of us because his divine justice demands it. God cannot justify wicked deeds. Nonetheless, I am made perfect in Christ, and wholly justified before the Father.

Indeed, Christ commanded that I be perfect even as my heavenly Father is perfect. Yet, the Lord is still pleased (desirous) that I should, on occasion, fall, that his infinite grace and mercy should be greater known through my inability to maintain an infallible walk; and that I should come to greater dependence in him.

Perfection is a requirement under God's moral law. God's law is still in effect, which is why he told us to be perfect as his Father is perfect.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

so you agree that God desires both your perfection while at the same time He has not willed it .

''Yet, the Lord is still pleased (desirous) that I should, on occasion, fall''

is it not plain that also what God commands ... He desires , for otherwise He would not desire to command it.

what I am getting at is that when God calls the reprobate to repent and promises him eternal life IF he would only believe on His Son , then that MUST be a genuine , sincere , "authentic" , and Loving gesture .

the reason Reprobates are in soooooooooo much trouble is that they have spurned God's Love ........ they have RESISTED His Spirit (known as The Spirit of Grace) they have OUTRAGED the Spirit of Grace , they have in some sense "trodden underfoot the Son of God" , they have GRIEVED the Holy Spirit , and they have spurned God's Love in Christ.

It is God who makes an appeal to them through the mouth of the believer , and they hate us because they Hate God .

To Break the Law (SIN) is punished by death .......... but to Reject and Despise Love is punishable by everlasting suffering.

Jon_ · Aug 22, 2005

cygnusx1 said:
first of all Jon , no-one has said you don't believe in preaching the Gospel to all , the issue is regarding what is meant by it (preaching the Gospel to all) ie , to the Genuiness of the "offer"

this quote may help ...........

I hadn't meant to imply that anyone had. My intention is to clearly distinguish my position from that of the hyper-Calvinist, as one might misunderstand what I am saying with the other.

cygnusx1 said:
6. The Westminster Standards

The term "offer" or "free offer" is used in the Westminster Standards (Westminster Confession of Faith VII/III; Larger Catechism Ans. 32, 63, 68; Shorter Catechism Ans. 31 and 86).

The Larger Catechism puts it beyond doubt that the term is used in reference to non-elect persons; "...who, for their wilful neglect and contempt of grace offered to them, being justly left in their unbelief, do never truly come to Jesus Christ" (Larger Catechism Ans. 68).

. . . wherein He freely offereth unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ, requiring of them faith in Him that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing and able to believe. (WCF 7:3)

Herein, I would argue that the use of the term "sinners" is apt indeed, as one must first acknowledge himself to be a sinner (must be regenerate) before he can receive the Gospel. I would also argue that, logically, the second part clause of this statement can only be taken to refer to those sinners who are ordained to life--those that the Holy Spirit makes willing and able to believe.

I neglected to search the catechisms (I only checked the Confession in passing), but since you have cited them, I will respond.

The grace of God is manifested in the second covenant, in that he freely provides and offers to sinners a Mediator, and life and salvation by him; and requiring faith as the condition to interest them in him, promises and gives his Holy Spirit to all his elect, to work in them that faith, with all other saving graces; and to enable them unto all holy obedience, as the evidence of the truth of their faith and thankfulness to God, and as the way which he has appointed them to salvation (Westminster Larger Catechism, Ans. 32).

Again, my argument here is much the same as in WCF 7:3. The offer is logically limited to those sinners who are regenerated by the Holy Spirit. The primary focus of this answer is the work of the Holy Spirit in the elect, who were sinners before faith. Just because all elect were sinners does not mean that all sinners are elect.

I reviewed Ans. 63 and found it to be irrelevant to the discussion, agreeing that only those who believe shall be saved, and saying nothing of a genuine Gospel offer to the reprobate.

All the elect, and they only, are effectually called; although others may be, and often are, outwardly called by the ministry of the Word, and have some common operations of the Spirit; who, for their willful neglect and contempt of the grace offered to them, being justly left in their unbelief, do never truly come to Jesus Christ (Westminster Larger Catechism, Ans. 68).

This is an interesting answer to me because it seems to be affirming what I have been talking about. Notice the use of the term "outwardly called," which I had readily distinguished from the "inward call." All acknowledge the existence and persistence of the outward call of the Gospel. But only the elect ever receive an inward call, this being effectual unto salvific faith. The "neglect and contempt of grace offered" does not in any way affirm that the offer is authentic because the outward call is an offer of grace. However, it is inwardly hear only by sinners who will acknowledge their sins and believe on the name of Jesus Christ.

While the reprobate understands that the Gospel declares him a sinner in need of redemption, yet he does not accept the premise of the argument (that he is a sinner), and thus he refuses the message. As God foreordains this rejection, the calling is not effectual, and thus, is never meant to be accepted at all. It defies reason that God should offer the Gospel with the intent of it being accepted to those whom he has ordained to reject it.

Even if it could be conclusively argued that the Westminster Divines decidedly held your position (which I reject that it can), it does not follow that the Confession is necessarily true, as it is a work of fallible men. Perhaps in this regard they are mistaken.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

cygnusx1 · Aug 23, 2005

Consider Noah , a preacher of Righteousness , for over a Hundred years he preached Repentance and saw not one conversion , was God sincere in telling them to repent?

Did it grieve God's heart when they refused , even though God witheld from them the gift of Repentance?

Next consider the case of Jonah , a man who knew all about God's Covenant Love , yet God spends Months showing Jonah that even those outside of the Covenant are immensely important to Him.

Did Jonah learn that God's Love , Grace and concerns don't remain solely for the Elect?

Now consider three cases of heartbreak.

1. God the Father heart broken over stubborn Israel (Hosea 11:8)
2.God The Son heart Broken over lost Jerusalem (Luke 19:41)
3.Paul the Apostle heart broken over Reprobate Jews (Romans 9)

are these cases (there are more) not indicative of real Love ?
Do we not see from God a real desire (DELIGHT) that men repent and are spared death?

Maybe a better way of wording this would be to say God has THREE aspects to His will:
God decreed only the Elect will be saved .
God's Will of desire is that the reprobate fall
God's inward desires (emotions corresponding with relationships) are to Bless not to kill. (God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked ........ He may have pleasure in executing Justice , but Mercy is far more desirable to God than Judgment , hence , God is Longsuffering over the vessels of wrath......)

Does God hate the reprobate?

Jacob the twister.....

It is God that Justifies

Jacob the twister.....

The Dude Abides

Jacob the twister.....

Senior Veteran

Jacob the twister.....

Senior Veteran

Jacob the twister.....

It is God that Justifies

Senior Veteran

Jacob the twister.....

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Jacob the twister.....

Jacob the twister.....

Senior Veteran

Jacob the twister.....

Senior Veteran

Jacob the twister.....

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency