General Call or Free Offer?

[the particular baptist]

Let's start a new thread to continue a discussion on the Law.

Aye. I'll collect my thoughts and hope to post maniana.

 

[heymikey80]

There's the point that both are included in the well-meant offer. The OPC holds to the Canons of Dordt.

Say to them, As I live, declares the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel? Ez 33:11

 

[heymikey80]

For the offer of salvation to be "well meant" and legit, it has to have something to offer, that means Christ had to purchase atonement for those who are eventually lost.

This is universalism, connect the dots...

This criticism doesn't comport with the level of division introduced by the well-meant offer.

I might just as well have said that if the offer were general, it must have something to offer generally, so that means Christ had to purchase atonement for those who are eventually lost.

A criticism that strikes against all positions is not conclusive against any.

The offer is the offer. Was the offer of life for lawkeeping not well-meant? It was. There's this Guy who was resurrected by keeping it. In fact, a lot of people will be resurrected for it through His lawkeeping.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

This criticism doesn't comport with the level of division introduced by the well-meant offer.

I might just as well have said that if the offer were general, it must have something to offer generally, so that means Christ had to purchase atonement for those who are eventually lost.

A criticism that strikes against all positions is not conclusive against any.

The offer is the offer. Was the offer of life for lawkeeping not well-meant? It was. There's this Guy who was resurrected by keeping it. In fact, a lot of people will be resurrected for it through His lawkeeping.

A command to repent isn't an offer. It is a command. The reprobate should repent and God told him he should repent. Does he repent then? No. He rejects God even in the face of revealed damnation.

 

[heymikey80]

A command to repent isn't an offer. It is a command. The reprobate should repent and God told him he should repent. Does he repent then? No. He rejects God even in the face of revealed damnation.

An offer of salvation on repentance is an offer. "that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel?" Ez 33:11

 

[JM]

An offer of salvation on repentance is an offer. "that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel?" Ez 33:11

mikey, you're a little late in the discussion. The points you raise have already been discussed. The ideas you bring to the table suggest the satisfaction for sin are accessible by the merit of faith and repentance and they are not. Grace, faith, and repentance are evangelical graces with man having no ability to perform them.

What you are suggesting is meriting the satisfaction of the cross with these evangelical graces.

 

[heymikey80]

I'm pointing out that the operation of faith through its exercise cannot be divorced from the results it brings about.

Faith is not meritorious. It is not because faith is found, but it is indeed through faith, that we are saved. In addition, faith is an instrument for justification.

To say that faith is simply an evangelical grace with no other operative qualities suggests that faith isn't an instrument. It's not that it's a cause to an effect, no. But to say it's not involved strikes through the heart of Reformed theology. An instrument is nothing if it's not an instrument. To say it's an instrument, it must be treated as an instrument.

How is faith instrumental?

God must be saying that He wished evil persons to repent -- persons who in fact didn't repent. Why? The tautological answer: because that's what He said. "11Say to them, As I live, declares the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel?" Ez 33:11

Let that sentiment of Augustine be ever present to our minds: " Wherefore, by the mighty and marvellous working of God (which is so exquisitely perfect in the accomplishment of every purpose and bent of His will), that, in a wonderful and ineffable way. is not done without His will which is even done contrary to His will, because it could not have been done had He not permitted it to be done; and yet, He did not permit it without His will, but according to His will." Calvin, quoting Augustine, "Secret Providence" p. 253

Anyone notice the treatise was called, "Secret Providence"? Anyone want to hazard a guess at what Calvin would call the providence that was not secreted, that is, not hidden?

 

[JM]

I'm happy you understand mikey, faith is an instrument given by God, it's an evangelical grace as the Baptist confession states. (Eph. 2)

 

[JM]

The following is a quote from Rev. Hanko, linked below...


What of Ezekiel 18:31-32 and Ezekiel 33:11? (52)



Dear Forum members,

We come now to the two passages which, more perhaps than any others are quoted in support of a gracious and well-meaning gospel offer. I refer to Ezekiel 18:31, 32: “Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.” (See also verse 23.)

A similar passage is found in Ezekiel 33:11: “Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?”

From a certain viewpoint, these passages from Ezekiel are the strongest proof for the well-meant and gracious gospel offer. Both mention the fact that God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Ezekiel 33:11 says also that God does have pleasure in the wicked repenting from their sins and living. And the rhetorical question is a powerful one: “Why will ye die, O house of Israel?”

Nevertheless, it is a perversion of the text to force it to prove an intention of God, or a desire on God’s part, to save all who hear the gospel. As a preliminary observation, we must point out that the text makes no mention of “grace.” After all, the well-meant offer is part and parcel of a common grace, which is an attitude of favor on God’s part and which he shows to all men in the preaching of the gospel.

I think this is crucially important. The grace of God can, in this connection also, be understood in two ways. It can refer to the fact that God looks with favor on all who hear the gospel and gives evidence of his favor towards them by expressing in the gospel his desire that they be saved. In other words (and it is not clear to me how this conclusion can be avoided) in the gospel God graciously gives all who hear a chance to be saved. God’s love, mercy, and grace are so great that God through the gospel makes salvation available to all that hear the gospel and earnestly desires that they seize on the opportunity and satisfy God’s desire.

But in the context of common grace, the grace that comes in the preaching of the gospel to all that hear is also a subjective grace given to each man so that he is put into a spiritual state in which he can make a choice either for or against the offer of the gospel. He has the grace to say, when he hears to the gospel, “No, I do not want to be saved;” or, “Yes I will accept the offer of Christ and so be saved.

In this respect, common grace as taught in the well-meant gospel offer is patterned after the Puritan conception of Preparationism. I have referred to this in earlier installments, and need not enter into this notion again.

But such a grace as is taught by the well-meant offer defendants leads directly into Arminianism. And Arminianism is contrary to Scripture, Calvinism and the Reformed faith.

But more important for our present purposes, no such idea can be gleaned from the texts in Ezekiel.

The second point we need to remember is that these passages must not be taken out of their context. In both passages in Ezekiel the Lord is answering an objection that Israel made against the Lord’s dealings with the nation.

In chapter 18 the context explains to us that the words of God in verses 23 and 32 were spoken because Israel charged God with double dealing. Especially, they said, this was true because they were being punished for the sins of their fathers.

God answers this by informing Israel when a righteous man turns from his righteousness, he will surely be punished; and when a wicked man turns from his wickedness, he will surely save his soul. For this reason God says that he will judge each man according to his own ways (30).

But God does not take pleasure in a righteous man turning away from his righteousness; but he does take pleasure in a wicked man turning away from his wickedness. And therefore he comes to Israel with the command, “Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions” (30).

This is the command of the gospel of which I already spoke at some length and which must be preached to all men. This is bound on all Reformed ministers by the Reformed confessions, specifically in Canons 2/5.

Chapter 33 is somewhat different, and may very well been spoken at a different time. The context here is a charge to the elders in Israel to be watchmen on the walls of the city, whose responsibility it is to warn the inhabitants of the city of the approach of an enemy. If they fail to do this, and people perish as a result, the blood of these people will be required of the watchmen.

It is worth our while to note that the principle God lays down in Ezekiel 33 is still in force today. How dreadful it is when the elders of a church fail to warn the people of enemies who constitute a spiritual danger to the church. And how much more dreadful it is when these watchmen actually conspired with the enemies to assist them in entering the city, something they do when they approve of false doctrine.

Ezekiel is therefore told that he must warn the people of the enemy. If he does this, and the people do not listen, then Ezekiel will be free from their blood (verse 9).

Apparently, the people of the captivity, to whom Ezekiel prophesied, complained that they were so punished by God in being brought into captivity that they saw no possibility of living once again (verse 10). The implied criticism of God was that God had no interest in them any more and that he did not really care if they died in Babylon.

To this Ezekiel, speaking God’s word, tells them that God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. He does have pleasure in repentance and a turning away from the wicked ways that characterized Israel’s life.

One more remark needs to be made. That is that Ezekiel is addressing the nation in captivity in their organic unity. That is, he is addressing the nation as a whole. But the nation, we must remember, consisted of many wicked who had gained control over the life of the nation and had led the nation into terrible idolatry so that the nation became ripe for judgment.

But there was also in that nation a remnant according to the election of grace. This remnant was small and seemingly insignificant. But it was represented by Daniel and his three friends, by Ezekiel himself, and by those who sang Psalm 137.

This word was spoken to the whole nation in its organic unity; that is, in such a way that the wicked and the faithful both heard it.

This truth remains always the same. The word of the gospel is proclaimed in the church in its organic unity. In that church are hypocrites and unfaithful members. But in that church are also believers, saved by the power of the gospel. To them all comes the word of God: “I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways, for why will ye die, O house of Israel?”

That is, as Canons 2.5 expresses it: God promises eternal life to all who receive the gospel and repent of their sins; but God condemns those who refuse to obey the command of the gospel.

Looking at the preaching from God’s point of view and from the viewpoint of his eternal purpose, God uses that gospel with its promise and its command to save his people through the work of the Spirit in their hearts. And he uses the same gospel to harden the wicked in their way that it may be shown that God is righteous in all his ways.

We will, God willing, look at the meaning of these passages in our next installment.

With warm regards,

Prof Hanko

 

[Osage Bluestem]

An offer of salvation on repentance is an offer. "that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel?" Ez 33:11

I don't believe it's an offer at all but simply a command to repent or else.

God reveals that death awaits those who do not repent. So, the entire world is commanded to repent and told that if they don't they will surely die.

 

[JustAsIam77]

What does repentance as mentioned in scripture mean, to turn from sin or to change one's mind, or both, just askin.

 

[JM]

Both. Logically, the first thing that needs to take part is being "born again." This is a work of God.

Philpot on Isa. 45.22, "Now, if we look at the Lord’s invitations in the Scriptures, to whom are they addressed? Are they not spoken to those who are poor and needy, hungry and thirsty, wearied and heavy laden? Are not these the very characters, whom the Lord enriches, feeds, refreshes, and blesses? Look, for instance, at the words of the text. There is an invitation in it; for the Lord speaks and says, "Look unto me." But to whom are the words addressed? "Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is none else." He does not, then, speak to those who are near, but to those who are afar off, the ends of the earth, and to them He addresses this gracious invitation."

The whole sermon explains the quickening work of the Spirit, repentance, etc.

The Lord's Invitation to the Ends of the Earth

John Rusk, "A coming sinner has a keen appetite, a thirst for all that God has promised; but a sinner that has come has been satisfied. Christ says, "If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink;" but you will agree with me, that when I have come to drink, my thirst is quenched. Now by this you may try yourself, and see whether you have as yet come to these waters, or whether you are only approaching; for, although you may have had some drops of rain, and likewise at times felt the heavenly dew, yet there is something wanting; and that is showers. I can remember that I had many sweet lifts, both under the Word and in private, with the saints, and in reading the Word and good books; but still I was a coming sinner, and therefore was not fully satisfied. "

The Universal Invitation of the Gospel

 

[JustAsIam77]

I disagree, I believe it is impossible for mortal man to turn away from sin in the flesh, repentance is a change of mind and heart by the indwelling spirit of the Holy Ghost whereby we abhor sinfulness even as we are carnally inclined to sin. Otherwise, Paul is wrong in stating, if it is (salvation) by grace, it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I disagree, I believe it is impossible for mortal man to turn away from sin in the flesh, repentance is a change of mind and heart by the indwelling spirit of the Holy Ghost whereby we abhor sinfulness even as we are carnally inclined to sin. Otherwise, Paul is wrong in stating, if it is (salvation) by grace, it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace.

Effectual calling is the reason the elect actually do repent. That doesn't mean that the reprobate has no responsibility to repent. It is bad to do evil and right to do good. Everyone must repent or die. The reprobate won't. The elect will, but only because of the irresistible grace of regeneration.

 

[the particular baptist]

Both. Logically, the first thing that needs to take part is being "born again." This is a work of God.

Philpot on Isa. 45.22, "Now, if we look at the Lord’s invitations in the Scriptures, to whom are they addressed? Are they not spoken to those who are poor and needy, hungry and thirsty, wearied and heavy laden? Are not these the very characters, whom the Lord enriches, feeds, refreshes, and blesses? Look, for instance, at the words of the text. There is an invitation in it; for the Lord speaks and says, "Look unto me." But to whom are the words addressed? "Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is none else." He does not, then, speak to those who are near, but to those who are afar off, the ends of the earth, and to them He addresses this gracious invitation."

The whole sermon explains the quickening work of the Spirit, repentance, etc.

The Lord's Invitation to the Ends of the Earth

Amen !

John Rusk, "A coming sinner has a keen appetite, a thirst for all that God has promised; but a sinner that has come has been satisfied. Christ says, "If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink;" but you will agree with me, that when I have come to drink, my thirst is quenched. Now by this you may try yourself, and see whether you have as yet come to these waters, or whether you are only approaching; for, although you may have had some drops of rain, and likewise at times felt the heavenly dew, yet there is something wanting; and that is showers. I can remember that I had many sweet lifts, both under the Word and in private, with the saints, and in reading the Word and good books; but still I was a coming sinner, and therefore was not fully satisfied. "

The Universal Invitation of the Gospel

Wonderful.

 

[the particular baptist]

I disagree, I believe it is impossible for mortal man to turn away from sin in the flesh, repentance is a change of mind and heart by the indwelling spirit of the Holy Ghost whereby we abhor sinfulness even as we are carnally inclined to sin. Otherwise, Paul is wrong in stating, if it is (salvation) by grace, it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace.

What do you disagree with, JM's articles ? The sinners spoken of in both articles are sinners who have been regenerated and made to feel themselves, naked, poor, needy, burdened, etc..

 

[JustAsIam77]

What do you disagree with, JM's articles ? The sinners spoken of in both articles are sinners who have been regenerated and made to feel themselves, naked, poor, needy, burdened, etc..

If the definition of repentance is to have the ability to turn from all sin I come up short, Christ's rightiousness is my rightiousness, anyone who believes they are worthy of Gods grace is mistaken, it is a gift, embrace it, cherish it but above all praise God for His mercy.

 

[the particular baptist]

If the definition of repentance is to have the ability to turn from all sin I come up short, Christ's rightiousness is my rightiousness, anyone who believes they are worthy of Gods grace is mistaken, it is a gift, embrace it, cherish it but above all praise God for His mercy.

I can agree. By repenting from sin i believe it to be a sorrow and hatred for sin whereas before it was indifference at the least. Not that any saved sinner has the ability to turn from all sin, theyre not free from sin till the body breathes its last. In this world for a saved sinner there will be a war between the old man and the new man created in Christ Jesus in perfect righteousness.

 

[JM]

What the particular baptist wrote...

 

[heymikey80]

As a preliminary observation, we must point out that the text makes no mention of “grace.” After all, the well-meant offer is part and parcel of a common grace, which is an attitude of favor on God’s part and which he shows to all men in the preaching of the gospel.

Does the passage make no mention of repentance?

Is repentance not indeed an evangelical grace?

Or was God unaware He was talking of grace?

I think this is crucially important.

I would think so, too. "turn and live" is either a description of grace, or it's not.

The wild thought that this is somehow going to drop the Orthodox Presbyterian Church into arminianism is clearly not carried out in history. One might just as well expect the Pope to become a Presbyterian.

To a great extent Calvin himself is resting on this point. So that would demand Calvin's theology held arminianism within it -- and so Dordt would be wrong. Such a contradiction essentially shatters Calvinism as a coherent view, and tries to set up a view further afield of Calvin -- hypercalvinism -- in its place. Either Calvin himself is plausible, or Dordt Calvinism was wrong to exclude arminianism. Having examined the alternatives, I'm pretty sure Calvin himself is plausible. And that makes the argument against his view being plausible, as implausible.

Hoeksema in the original article tried to assail Berkhof over this very thing. Maybe he should've read "Secret Providence" a little more carefully. It deprived him of Calvin's support.

Inasmuch as the Law is a reasonable path to eternal life, so too is the offer of salvation to anyone who turns in reliance. Both are truly well-meant -- meaning that both are reasonable alternatives for good people to take. But there's an obvious problem. The problem is clearly evil in the human heart -- an unwillingness common to all humankind. So as plausible and reasonable an offer as both are -- neither can be grasped by the rebellious, irrational human will.

So too is the twofold will of God established, Who has a moral will as well as a decretive will, a will that desires the good, and a will which declares and organizes every event in history. They're different. And they must ultimately resolve as compatible in the full character of God.

It would be wise not to accuse those holding the well-meant offer of positions they don't hold.