Rich as you know this is a much discussed topic and I don't have the time to rehearse all of the details of it here. For the last 25 years of my life I've aquainted myself with the arguments to and fro. But in a nutshell, what drives me to the conclusions I hold are the arguments of the divines I rehearsed (especially Calvin). In short they are:

[1] Exegetically I just can't explain away certain verses of Scripture (e.g. 1 John 2:2, John 3:16). I've read all the explanations that do explain them away, and (in my mind) they don't hold water. Owen is particularly unconvincing here. The arguments usually entail bad understandings of semantics and how words have meaning in context; the modern study of linguistics has taught us much.

[2] Concerning the WMO: strictly speaking a one-end view logically entails that we can't tell unbelievers to repent and believe (as Scripture clearly does), because the atonement might not be for them. It's not then an issue of us not knowing the hidden will of God so we should just tell everyone to repent and believe. We can't have the luxury of saying it's their duty to do so, because if the atonement is limited to the elect, then it has a limited duty to the elect; there is no (gospel) duty encumbent on the reprobate. The two wills of God do not apply that easily here, because the atonement's one-end (unlike say natural law) is for the elect alone, it entails no "universal duty". All the efforts to deny this, don't make sense IMHO. This is where I agree with people like John Murray, Scott Clark, and Ken Stebbins. This is where (exgetically) 1 Tim. 2:4 and Ezek are (to me) crystal clear.

[3] Concerning those who never hear, whether triple or double end ultimately ends in semantics. This is because Paul's words in Acts 17 speak of those who have general revelation do so in order that they may seek God and perhaps reach out and find him. General revelation should start the process which arrives at salvation (explicitly hearing the gospel). (I have a friend who recently became a Christian which all began from him seeking the God he concluded must exist from observing the wonder of creation over here in Australia).

I respect the opinions of those who differ with me on these points and will no way start telling them they're unreformed. The tradition has latitude here.

Anyway, my time is limited and I must run. I doubt I'll be around for the next few weeks. Thanks for the patience Rich, and God bless you richly.

__________________
Marty

"There is nothing so necessary to draw us to repentance as good thoughts of God." (Thomas Manton)

I did interact with the "citations." It is in the portion of text previous to the sentence you quoted from my last post. These divines affirm hypothetical sufficiency or an indefinite reference in the atonement, but neither equates to a universal reference in the sense that Christ died for each and every man without exception. You are reading this universal reference into their words, which is what happens when you make an old divine dress in new clothes.

David Paraeus: "the death of Christ is also sufficient for their salvation, if they will but believe." -- "If" = Hypothetical sufficiency.

Jacob Kimodoncius: "For he truly gave himself a price of redemption sufficient for all, none excepted at all of the whole universality of men: but because the unbelievers do not apply redemption to themselves, the wrath of God abides on them. Also, he gave himself the price of reconciliation for all that belongs to the universality of the elect, and to his own body. Again, for all indefinitely, that is, for whomsoever Jews and Gentiles, high and low, masters and servants, as it has been often already said." -- "Whole universality" = indefinite universality, not all inclusive universality.

William Twisse: And accordingly professe that Christ dyed for all, that is, to obteyne pardon of sinne and salvation of soule for all, but how? not absolutely whether they believe or no, but only conditionally, to witt provided they doe believe in Christ." "Conditionally" = Hypothetical sufficiency.

[Note: The express purpose William Twisse enters into this argument is to refute a universal reference in the atonement. Quoting this section to prove something which was contrary to the writer's aim only serves to show ignorance of the original work. But this is typically what happens when authors are quoted second hand ad nauseam.]

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."

Brotheer Marty:

John 3;16 is easily understood when the correct rendering of the greek 'pas ho pisteuon' , which is whoever IS the believer. SHould be rendered:

16for God did so love the world, that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish.

The present tense is the noun not the verb. And nothing is added to make this a continuous action.

__________________
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."

Dear brother Matthew,

I'm very saddened that you've said this because it is an attack on the person (trying to make them look stupid). Why? It generates heat not light. Moreover, you've made a statement in ignorance. I have exhaustively read Twisse's English writings for my PhD, and have not quoted anyone "second hand" (I quoted the primary source material). It was in reading Twisse that I was shocked to see what he said about the atonement, and it was he who started me looking further into it in the rest of the tradition.

I'm also perplexed by your explanations of the primary source material, because it's just not interacting with what they're saying. Scudder (for example) clearly says that all people have been made "saveable".

If you wish to disagree with my (and Muller's) reading of the soures, feel free. But I plead with you to refrain from attacking people. This is a board that conducts conversations before a watching world and we want Christ's name to be exalted in our generous and gracious conversation.

God's richest blessing to you my revered brother Matthew.

__________________
Marty

"There is nothing so necessary to draw us to repentance as good thoughts of God." (Thomas Manton)

Marty, if you have read Twisse, then you yourself know the main point he was making; I shouldn't have to clarify it for the sake of others who haven't read his work.

If you prize your reputation before the watching world, then you might think about being more cautious before staking your reputation on indefensible positions. If you engage with others who take a different view than you, then you should be prepared to have your scholarship questioned. Playing the victim is neither manly nor Christian. Charity is not so easily offended.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."

I've nowhere said that I prize my reputation. Mine is irrelevant. Christ's is everything.

So Richard Muller has an "indefensible position"? Brother please be more generous for the sake of Christ.

__________________
Marty

"There is nothing so necessary to draw us to repentance as good thoughts of God." (Thomas Manton)

Brother, I try by God's grace to be generous to people be they Christian or otherwise; but one should never be generous to a doctrinally erroneous position. 2 Corinthians 4:2.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."

I fully agree that Christ did not die for the reprobate, and that there is no hypothetic universalism. However, this does not mean that, in some sense, God does not desire the wicked to repent.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

Brother Marty, it is your duty to defend your own good name, just as Paul did.

Blessings friend.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

Then all these men who are considered double enders at Dort and Westminster, were actually not? I am confused here Matthew. Is there such a thing as Amyrauldism then or not? IF so, then who was on that team at these 2 gatherings of the minds?

__________________
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."

Then you need to figure out what that sense is Daniel, not me.

__________________
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."

This presupposes that no Biblical truths are above human reason.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

This one is not!!! By using the analogy of faith, we can conclude there is no desire for the reprobate to repent. We do not know who they are and neither do they. Do you not find it odd daniel, that there are examples of them repenting and still cast away? Judas, Saul, are 2..

__________________
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."

I did some digging and found a Calvinist willing to state what he believes are the universal benefits of the limited atonement. Dr. Curt Daniel suggests several points, summarized as follows:

* Common Grace--C.H. Spurgeon said, “Christ hath bought some good things for all men - the common mercies of life.” “Every man receives that is good can be traced back to the atonement. He has Christ to thank for the sunshine he sees, the food he eats, the family he has, and so on. He deserves none of these, but Christ purchased them for him.”

* Delay of Wrath – all men deserve immediate wrath and judgment. Christ purchased a “stay of execution” for them.

* Lord of the Living and the Dead— Rom. 14:9, “For to this end Christ died and lived again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living.” By His death and Resurrection, Christ is now Lord of all men, both elect and reprobate. Chirst is the Lord of all—believer and unbeliever.

* Free Offer of the Gospel--Calvinists usually ground the universal free offer of the Gospel in the infinite sufficiency of the atonement. This is why the strictest views of the atonement tend to restrict or even deny the free offer, as in Hyper-Calvinism. Because there is more than enough food on the table, all are invited to partake, even though only few do.

Frankly, I have always wondered why the issue of Common Grace falls under the atonement. Nevertheless, here are some targets for some of you to shoot down.

__________________
Dennis E. McFadden, Ex Mainline Baptist (in Remission)
Atherton Baptist Homes, CEO
First Baptist Church of Alhambra, Member, Transformation Ministries (CA)

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

So why are the wicked commanded to repent? Are you saying that God commands them to embrace Christ but he does not want them to embrace Christ?

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

You are the one saying that, not I. God provides what He requires Daniel. The Gospel has a distinction between elect and reprobate. One it is life, the other it is death. We preach to all men, but it is not FOR all men. All I know is God get's what He wants and desired Daniel. You leave God disappointed..

__________________
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."

God commands all men to obey Him and is angry when they rebel; if you can accept that, then why can you not accept that he wants sinners to repent?

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)