According to this definition, do the reprobate receive any of them? I say not one bit. Now on the flip side, those who do receive grace can not turn this into some entitlement and boast. True grace will always create meeknes and humility.

__________________
N. Robert; Trinity Reformed Church RCA, Holland MI

Once in a while you can get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right."

What does God owe all sinners?

All have sinned (Rom. 3:23) and have earned the wages thereof which is death (Rom. 6:23). Therfore, God owes all death.

But he does not immediately deliver that punishment to all who deserve it. Rather he bears with great patience the objects of his wrath, so as to make his wrath, power and grace known to the objects of his mercy (Rom. 9:22,23). During that time, "he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked" (Luke 6:35). It is clear from the immediate context that Christ would say that in a certain sense God does good to his enemies since Jesus commands us to do good to our enemies on the premise that if we do so "we will be sons of the Most High,..." and to "be merciful, just as your Father is merciful" (v.36).
In Matthew the command to love our enemies leads to the conclusion "that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his son to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." (Matt. 5:44,45).

Although the extent of God's benevolence to unrighteous enemies who deserve nothing but death is ulitmately limited by the exercise of his just wrath upon them, the kindness and mercy shown by God to these enemies in this life is explicitly taught by Jesus and we cannot and must not deny it. To deny that blessings extended to the reprobate sinners are expressions of God's kindness and mercy is to let our theological reasoning trump an explicit Scriptural statement, which is an error we should never commit.

Since mercies are like grace in that both are blessings one receives contrary to that which one deserves, one might call these blessings received by the wicked a limited kind of grace (especially when compared to the grace the believer receives). I do not believe, however, that Scripture ever uses the term "grace" to describe them. If it does, the term "common grace" is fully appropriate to describe them. But if Scripture never uses "grace" to define mecies received by unbelievers, we may legitimately avoid the possibility of confusion and equivocation by describing them as "common mercies" since "mercies", as has been shown, has explicit Scriptural support.

But whatever term we use, we must recognize that these gospel passages do teach that God shows that he is, to a real, if limited extent, truly kind, merciful and loving to his enemies, even though that presents us with a theological confict that we must resolve. Those who deny the term "common grace" for the mercies unbelievers receive must never deny the reality of God's kindness, mercy and love expressed to unbelievers in God's common benevolences. For Scripture will not let us do so.

__________________
In Christ's love and service

Mr. Tim Cunningham, Dip. CS (Regent College)
Member, First Baptist Church
Vancouver, BC

------------
"The Reformation was a time when men went blind, staggering drunk because they had discovered, in the dusty basement of late medievalism, a whole cellar of 1500-year-old, 200 proof grace—a bottle after bottle of pure distillate of Scripture, one sip of which would convince anyone that God saves us single-handedly. The word of the gospel—after all these centuries of trying to lift yourself into heaven by worrying about the perfection of your own bootstraps—suddenly turned out to be a flat announcement that the saved were home-free before they started. Grace was to be drunk neat: no water, no ice, and certainly no ginger ale." – Robert Farrar Capon

Indeed, Tim, as Psalm 85 also says:

The Lord is good to all. His tender mercies are over all his works - (from memory)

Important also for us to remember how undeserving we are. God would be justified, and still good to us, if he condemned all humankind to eternal perdition.

__________________
Bert Mulder
Elder of the First Protestant Reformed Church of Edmonton
Edmonton Alberta Canada

Again, I think a definition of "grace" (in this context) apart from God's salvific work is found wanting. Especially since we know that each temporal provision God gives to the reprobate ends up only compounding their judgment in the end. That's justice, not grace.

__________________
Josh Hicks, Chloë's Daddy
Member of TRBC, Attending CCRPC. My Blog
The Puritan Pub (Team Blog)
Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I think one of the problems that adds to the confusion over this whole question comes down to the actual word "grace." The word "grace" as used in the Scriptures is always used in the sense of that "grace" that flows from the redemptive work of our Lord Jesus Christ. I haven't yet found an instance in which the word "grace" is used in reference to the reprobate.

I'm personally much more comfortable speaking of God's "common benevolence" (goodness) rather than "common grace" as I find nothing "common" about the grace of our God; rather, I find His grace to be quite particular. That said, I think many folks use the term "common grace" and actually mean something closer to "common benevolence."

There's also the issue of temporal experiences versus how those experiences are counted eternally. Do the reprobate enjoy good things in this life? I have to say "yes." They enjoy good things like food, drink, marriage, sex, having children, the satisfaction of work and play, etc. These are good things that they enjoy temporally. Will these things be used against them on the day of Judgment? Yes, because they enjoyed the good things God has given them and never acknowledged from whom those good things came; they failed to give praise to whom praise is due. But were those things that they enjoyed actually "good things," I think so... So, I think there's a distinction to be made between the fact that those things are truly good things and how they might be used at the Judgment. Temporally, they are good things, but eternally those good things will be counted against them.

Just my thoughts... I don't know which option in the poll best suits my understanding...

Cheers!

__________________
Pastor Steve Bradley
Trinity Reformed Presbyterian Church (RPCNA)
www.trinityrpc.org
www.sermonaudio.com/trinityrpc
www.reformedvoice.com/trinityrpc
Riva, MD

Amen, Pastor Bradley. This is what I was trying to get at with these posts, but obviously failed!

__________________
Josh Hicks, Chloë's Daddy
Member of TRBC, Attending CCRPC. My Blog
The Puritan Pub (Team Blog)
Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Hi Josh,

I failed to read your post thoroughly as I tried to catch up. You did a fine job, so my post was a bit superfluous.

Blessings!

__________________
Pastor Steve Bradley
Trinity Reformed Presbyterian Church (RPCNA)
www.trinityrpc.org
www.sermonaudio.com/trinityrpc
www.reformedvoice.com/trinityrpc
Riva, MD

__________________
Vaughan
BTh Student, Sydney Missionary Bible College
Ashfield Presbyterian Church
Sydney, Australia
The Ransomed

I was reading Henry on Romans 2 tonight and this thread came to my mind.

__________________
Ryan Barnhart - Pastor of OGBC
Husband to a beautiful wife, Father to two beautiful girls
"But by the grace of God I am what I am." I Corinthians 15:10

"I confess to you, that if I can but live and die serving the Lord Jesus, it will make no difference to me whether I am eaten by Cannibals or by worms. And in the Great Day my Resurrection body will rise as fair as yours in the likeness of our risen Redeemer." - John Paton

I agree more with option 2. I figure that Christ's sacrifice on the Cross is only for the elect's salvation. period. Neverless, my interpretation of Scripture gives the impression that God shows a degree of kindness (which could be considered some sort of grace) towards the damned in that he has granted the reprobate some blessings in their earthly life.

Either way just my

__________________
Stuart Thomason
Brownson Memorial Presbyterian PC(USA)
Southern Pines, NC

I personally agree with option 2.

The grace purchased by Christ's atoning work was of a different nature than that of God's common grace. In order to forgive the sins of His people it was necessary for Christ to shed His own blood, but His atonement is not necessary for God to show His common grace to reprobates. His common grace is not a pledge to redeem those to whom it is shown, but simply to express His own goodness towards His creatures. I hope this makes sense.

In response to option 3, any grace received by reprobates is real grace, though of a different sort. Although it is true that the ultimate purpose for which God shows this grace to the non-elect is to judge them and to make known his mercy to vessels fitted for glory, still these acts of kindness still maintain their gracious quality. In other words, God is not deceiving people by displaying kindness towards them, but in fact is truly showing mercy towards them.

There is a passage of Scripture I would like you guys to comment on. It is Romans 2:4 - "Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?" I been studying the subject of the dual will of God, that is, His will of decree versus His will of command. Though it is said in Romans 9:22 and 23 that God's intention in being patient towards the reprobate is to bring judgement upon them, it also says in the above quoted passage that Gods general kindness is "meant to lead you to repentance?" How would you reconcile these two passages?

__________________
David Wakefield
Covenant of Grace Presbyterian Church (ARP)
Winston-Salem, NC

"If you could have chosen your own circumstances and condition in life, you could not have made so wise a choice as God has made for you."
- Charles Haddon Spurgeon