Does God Show Grace to the Reprobate?

[Sonoftheday]

Does God Show Grace, in any form to the reprobate??

1. Yes, this grace was purchased by Jesus on the Cross.

2. Yes, this grace was not purchased by the cross.

3. No, whatever theyre given that appears to be grace is only to add to thier judgment.

 

[Davidius]

Good poll!

 

[Sonoftheday]

Im really too ignorant to follow all of the discussion that is going on over on the John Piper Limited Atonement thread, but I think that this is the topic that is being disputed the most. The other reason I posted it as a poll is because I honestly cant answer the question.

On one hand how can a Holy, Perfect, God show grace to sinners unless by Christ.

On the other hand how can grace for the Reprobate be bought by Christ if he did not take any of their sins upon himself, nor impute any of his righteousness to them.

On the third hand, it goes against the teaching of Common Grace I have always understood.

 

[Amazing Grace]

Absolutely not.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Yes, this is shown by Jesus' teachings to love our neighbors and our enemies.

 

[moral necessity]

Sure he does! Hence, the doctrine of common grace, and the difference between it and saving grace. If there were no grace or mercy shown to the unregenerate, then every unregenerate person would be unrestrained and wicked to the nth degree. There would be no varying degrees of wickedness manifesting itself in the world. All unregenerate would be like devils, since "they are of their father the devil". In my mind, the absence of grace and mercy is what hell is for. If the unregenerate are without some degree of grace and mercy now, then they are already experiencing hell, and their awaiting judgment would be no worse. With my imperfect and still impaired understanding, that's how I would answer the question at this time. A good reference is "A Treatise on Grace" by Jonathan Edwards. Soli Deo Gloria published it in 2002 as a 66 page paperback under the title Standing in Grace. An excellent read!

 

[Zenas]

I am of the persuasion of number 2.

I believe that grace is shown to the reprobate, but not by the Cross. I think that it is more accurate to say that the cross bought mercy for the elect, not necessarily grace, I may be incorrect here though. I make a distinction between mercy and grace which is expounded upon by A.W. Pink in "The Attributes of God", which I have conveineintly misplaced. If anyone has a copy and knows what I am talking about, maybe they can shed some light there.

 

[bookslover]

Yes, the reprobate experience God's common grace.

 

[historyb]

Yes, the way I figure it God causes the rain to fall on the righteous and unrighteous.

 

[sotzo]

If somebody told me that I was going to come into existence in another life, live in ease and complete well being all my days, but that at the end of that life I would experience eternal pain and suffering....would that be grace? Wouldn't it be grace to have not brought me into existence in that other life in the first place?

Hence, I say no.

 

[toddpedlar]

Yes, the way I figure it God causes the rain to fall on the righteous and unrighteous.

I really fail to see how this is in any way "grace". Is it grace to give to someone the tools with which
they will effect their own death? Suppose that a neighbor desperately wanted to hammer some nails in his house to
hang up some pictures, but had no hammer. Knowing that it would explode upon first contact with a nail,
you hand him a handy unpinned hand grenade for him to use as a hammer.

Was yours a gracious gift?

 

[Davidius]

Yes, the way I figure it God causes the rain to fall on the righteous and unrighteous.

I really fail to see how this is in any way "grace". Is it grace to give to someone the tools with which
they will effect their own death? Suppose that a neighbor desperately wanted to hammer some nails in his house to
hang up some pictures, but had no hammer. Knowing that it would explode upon first contact with a nail,
you hand him a handy unpinned hand grenade for him to use as a hammer.

Was yours a gracious gift?

The tricky part for me is the context in which that statement is made. Christ says "Love your enemies." Why? "For he makes the sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have?"

So is Jesus saying that our love for enemies is a reflection of God's love for his enemies? Does that mean that these acts really are in some way "gracious," and not merely acts meant to heap up more judgment?

 

[Amazing Grace]

Yes, the way I figure it God causes the rain to fall on the righteous and unrighteous.

I really fail to see how this is in any way "grace". Is it grace to give to someone the tools with which
they will effect their own death? Suppose that a neighbor desperately wanted to hammer some nails in his house to
hang up some pictures, but had no hammer. Knowing that it would explode upon first contact with a nail,
you hand him a handy unpinned hand grenade for him to use as a hammer.

Was yours a gracious gift?

The tricky part for me is the context in which that statement is made. Christ says "Love your enemies." Why? "For he makes the sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have?"

So is Jesus saying that our love for enemies is a reflection of God's love for his enemies? Does that mean that these acts really are in some way "gracious," and not merely acts meant to heap up more judgment?

Grace of man to man is not grace from God to man. To say, "He is very gracious, just means he is nice, very friendly"

The reason we are told to do this is becasue it actually brings more judgment upon them. "Heaping hot coals on their head" This is a symbol of judgment.

This thought of the sun and rain is misleading. Can I conclude then when there is a drought, God is not gracious? Or in the antarctic where there is no sun nor rain for months, God is not being gracious?

We love our enemies becasue we are told to do that. God is not bound by this obviously since He destroys all His enemies. WItholds the Gospel, blinds them, deafens their ears.

We are not to repa evil for evil, Vengeance is the Lord's.

I also have a question with poll's, why are they anonymous? Can we not see who voted for what? There is a tendancy for those who are in the minority not to express themselves openly. I find this disturbing. From what I gather here, me and Todd are no voters, yet 12 people voted no, so where are the other 10? Speak up or dont vote!!!!!!

 

[Davidius]

I really fail to see how this is in any way "grace". Is it grace to give to someone the tools with which
they will effect their own death? Suppose that a neighbor desperately wanted to hammer some nails in his house to
hang up some pictures, but had no hammer. Knowing that it would explode upon first contact with a nail,
you hand him a handy unpinned hand grenade for him to use as a hammer.

Was yours a gracious gift?

The tricky part for me is the context in which that statement is made. Christ says "Love your enemies." Why? "For he makes the sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have?"

So is Jesus saying that our love for enemies is a reflection of God's love for his enemies? Does that mean that these acts really are in some way "gracious," and not merely acts meant to heap up more judgment?

Grace of man to man is not grace from God to man. To say, "He is very gracious, just means he is nice, very friendly"

The reason we are told to do this is becasue it actually brings more judgment upon them. "Heaping hot coals on their head" This is a symbol of judgment.

This thought of the sun and rain is misleading. Can I conclude then when there is a drought, God is not gracious? Or in the antarctic where there is no sun nor rain for months, God is not being gracious?

We love our enemies becasue we are told to do that. God is not bound by this obviously since He destroys all His enemies. WItholds the Gospel, blinds them, deafens their ears.

We are not to repa evil for evil, Vengeance is the Lord's.

I also have a question with poll's, why are they anonymous? Can we not see who voted for what? There is a tendancy for those who are in the minority not to express themselves openly. I find this disturbing. From what I gather here, me and Todd are no voters, yet 12 people voted no, so where are the other 10? Speak up or dont vote!!!!!!

 

[raekwon]

Is it not grace for God to even allow a sinner his next breath instead of pouring out his wrath immediately upon birth?

 

[Pilgrim Standard]

If Christ would not have made substitutionary atonement then would Adam and Eve would have been cast into hell immediately upon sinning? Does this not carry on to the reprobate? How is it that a reprobate can take a single breath of air if it is not for common grace? What is the grounds for common grace. I dare say it is the Sacrifice of Christ. Those who disagree that common grace was purchased by Christ and is extended to the sinner must answer the question, “How does the reprobate yet live on this earth when the punishment for sin is hell?” If they live because God is longsuffering then is this longsuffering not the common grace of God? If the grounds for this common grace is not Christ then what are the grounds by which his forensic judgment may be delayed?

 

[caddy]

I voted no. As rational and moral beings, we are endowed with a capacity to recognize what is intrinsically worthy of our gratitude. If our daily existence is not one of awe and appreciation to God, how can it be said that He is gracious to us? Not telling, just asking. *** shrug *** Giving Him our undying gratitude, that is only graciously given by His hand to us, we acknowledge just how gracious He is--to us. Is He really gracious to the reprobate, or just long-suffering with them?

Even Nietzsche was reported at times that he was overcome by "gratitude." So, what are we to make of reprobates like Nietzsche who was "thankful" yet had NO OBJECT for that thankfulness? He may have been overwhelmed by many of God's great gifts in this life, but they all pale in comparison to His greatest gift. Nietzsche's object should have been Immanuel, God with us (Us:His elect ), But God in His infinite wisdom chose not to show Nietzsche.

Still however, overwhelmed by this fact it is my daily duty to befriend the lost and encourage and pray for those who are not of this mind in hopes that God will graciously work through me and bring one more soul to His kingdom...for His glory and His honor, Amen?

 

[Pilgrim Standard]

God "causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous" (Matt. 5:45).

If this is not Grace then words have no meaning.

 

[Mayflower]

God "causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous" (Matt. 5:45).

If this is not Grace then words have no meaning.

It's providence!

 

[Sonoftheday]

I still have not voted because I am not completely swayed one way or another.

I am leaning towards no though because of this.
God shows grace to his elect. How can a just God show grace to those who are ill deserving? Because Christ is our(the elect) mediator, and his atonement was substitutionary. Christ is not the mediator for the reprobate so how can God remain Just and show them grace at all??

 

[Theogenes]

I voted NO. If grace is God's unmerited favor, does God show favor to the reprobate? John Owen said that any good (like rain, sunshine, etc- In other words,, any "success") that the reprobates receive in this life is just like "fattening the ox for the slaughter". The vessels of wrath are endured with much patience by the all holy God and their purpose is the manifestation of God's glory in temporal and eternal judgments. "The Lord has made everything for Himself,Yes,even the wicked for the day of doom" (Prov.16:4)

 

[Amazing Grace]

If Christ would not have made substitutionary atonement then would Adam and Eve would have been cast into hell immediately upon sinning? Does this not carry on to the reprobate? How is it that a reprobate can take a single breath of air if it is not for common grace? What is the grounds for common grace. I dare say it is the Sacrifice of Christ. Those who disagree that common grace was purchased by Christ and is extended to the sinner must answer the question, “How does the reprobate yet live on this earth when the punishment for sin is hell?” If they live because God is longsuffering then is this longsuffering not the common grace of God? If the grounds for this common grace is not Christ then what are the grounds by which his forensic judgment may be delayed?

Benjamin, as this question was asked in the piper thread, there is no scriptural evidence that speaks of immediate death upon the reprobate sinner. If there is one, I cannot find it. And please do not use the 'necessary consequence' clause that has lead so many to believe a lie.

but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

Did Adam and Eve immediately die? No. Did Cain immediately die? no. There is not one record in the writ that speaks of sin bringing immediate physical death. And nothing that links this to common grace or the blood of Christ. The reprobate are "vessels of wrath, having been fitted out for destruction" (Rom 9:22). Their time on earth is to be spent being hardened according to God’s desire (Rom 9:18), in order for God to display His wrath and to make His power known (Rom 9:22), and also to make the riches of His glory known to the elect (Rom 9:33). The reprobate, during their lives, are being fattened for the kill. They are heaping up damnation upon themselves. The fact that they do not immediately go to hell after they are conceived is certainly not grace by any stretch. By living their lives, they increase their condemnation, which is exactly what they deserve.

Look at Judas, Christ said: "Truly the Son of Man goes as it as been written concerning Him, but woe to that man through whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It were GOOD for him if that man had NEVER BEEN BORN" (Mar 14:21)! Lettign Judas live had nothing to do with the death of Christ. He says it himself...Grace to Judas would have been GOOD if he were NEVER BORN.....

 

[a mere housewife]

I voted Yes, but this grace was not purchased on the cross. It is the 'exuberant goodness' of the Creator to His creation. His tender mercies are over all His works.

If you want define grace as salvific then the answer would of course be no. But is grace necessarily defined that way?

"But of even greater significance is it that with Calvin reprobation does not mean the withholding of all grace. Although man thraugh sin has been rendered blind to all the spiritual realities of the kingdom of God, so that a special revelation of God’s fatherly love in Christ and a specialis illuminatio by the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the sinners here become necessary, nevertheless there exists alongside of these a generalis gratia which dispenses to all men various gifts...."

(from Calvin and Common Grace by Herman Bavinck. I don't know much about Herman Bavinck, but this seems consistent with what I've understood from the first book of the Institutes which I've almost finished?)

As to unmerited favor, I hope that no one would argue that the gifts the reprobate receive from God (& according to Romans they fail to give thanks to God- they have then real reason for gratitude) are merited?

[edit: it seems to me to add a further complication, if one wants to reject a doctrine of common grace in every form -the sheer abundant and unmerited goodness of the gifts God has as Creator dispensed even to the reprobate- of having to reject every non-Christian contribution to culture on almost any level? Perhaps that is way off topic, but I dont see how one can reject common grace without also rejecting -not only the reading of Plato but Bertrand Russells mathematical contributions, or running water unless we can prove it was invented by a Christian.]

 

[a mere housewife]

Sorry to double post, but I wanted to quickly add something my husband pointed out to me as I probably won't be able to keep up much more with the discussion: that I was forgetting to think in terms of the Spirit's restraint on sin. As my husband pointed out, this is not the fruit of Christ's death saving them from sin. It is then God's goodness based in something besides the cross (and I believe that is His benevolence to His creatures as their Creator). But it does seem that the goodness of God does not add to but would actually mitigate the sinner's damnation in regard to His restraint upon them.

 

[Pilgrim Standard]

Did Adam and Eve immediately die? No. Did Cain immediately die? no.

Precisely what I am talking about. They were not burning in hell that instant. Neither the elect nor the reprobate.

Perhaps I am blind, so help me out here.
Not burning in hell this moment, even though we all deserve it seems like grace to me.
Certainly for the elect, this grace is purchased by Christ. But for the reprobate is this not Grace to be free from the torments of hell this very moment? And who can argue that it is not better for the reprobate to never have been born, not only does the Word say this but logic implies the same. The issue being presented here is grace to the reprobate. But the question is not what is better, to have been born or not, but if grace is extended to them and by what means. This is not a question of the highest level degree of grace given to the sinner but if any is given unto them. Is not enjoying the light of nature itself grace from God? Men condemn themselves by their actions yet God allows them to live and that is not grace? Help me out here, seriously.

So then what is common grace and is it not extended to the sinner?

 

[Zenas]

Though I agree that grace is shown to both classes, I think it is incorrect to say that the grace we as Christians currently enjoy in that we are not cast into the fire immediately was the one purchased by Christ because this is something all the peoples of the Earth seem to enjoy. We do presently enjoy other things such as peace with God and statuts as His children and those are purchaed by Christ, but they are also not shared with the rest of the world either. I think what was purchased by Christ for us on the cross is entirely alien to a reprobate, in that nothing He did is applicable to them in any way. To say that niether we nor them are cast into Hell, yet we are not so because of Christ seems a bit useless to me. I think it is common grace on both sides of the fence.

Yet then it dawns on me at the close of that paragraph the differentiation mentioned earlier, so I can more clearly see where you may be comming from. The reprobate are endured by God, and are not cast into Hell presently, whereas the elect are not endured by God, but rather when God looks upon us (Lord willing we are all His) He sees the righteousness of His Son imputed on us. God does not have to endure us because God delights in us as He delights in Christ.

So I suppose now, I would have to say I kind of see your point.

Move along from this useless drivel.

 

[Amazing Grace]

Did Adam and Eve immediately die? No. Did Cain immediately die? no.

Precisely what I am talking about. They were not burning in hell that instant. Neither the elect nor the reprobate.

Perhaps I am blind, so help me out here.
Not burning in hell this moment, even though we all deserve it seems like grace to me.
Certainly for the elect, this grace is purchased by Christ. But for the reprobate is this not Grace to be free from the torments of hell this very moment? And who can argue that it is not better for the reprobate to never have been born, not only does the Word say this but logic implies the same. The issue being presented here is grace to the reprobate. But the question is not what is better, to have been born or not, but if grace is extended to them and by what means. This is not a question of the highest level degree of grace given to the sinner but if any is given unto them. Is not enjoying the light of nature itself grace from God? Men condemn themselves by their actions yet God allows them to live and that is not grace? Help me out here, seriously.

So then what is common grace and is it not extended to the sinner?

First off, there is nothing 'common' about God's grace towards His elect whatsoever. There is one grace mentioned in the writ.

2) good will, loving-kindness, favour

a) of the merciful kindness by which God, exerting his holy influence upon souls, turns them to Christ, keeps, strengthens, increases them in Christian faith, knowledge, affection, and kindles them to the exercise of the Christian virtues

Theere is no such beast as a half way grace of God. Benevolence is not grace. The reason they were not burning in hell was becasue death is always spoken about in Spiritual terms in relating to sin.

Until you wrestle with Judas, I have nothing left to say. Christ said Himsel fit were better for him not to be born. Yet you imply that Christ lied and was actually showing him grace becasue he lived..

 

[Pilgrim Standard]

Until you wrestle with Judas, I have nothing left to say. Christ said Himsel fit were better for him not to be born. Yet you imply that Christ lied and was actually showing him grace becasue he lived..

WOOOOOhhhh. That is a grand charge to say that I have cast implication that Christ has lied! I am asking for help here. I Want To have a Greater Understanding. That was handled very poorly my friend. Perhaps pointing out that an implication could be made by what I have stated would be better than the way that you handled it?

I do not doubt that it would be better for him not to have been born since his destiny was damnation. But I just can't see how not being in hell for one second is not in any way grace. This is the point that I can not get over. I do agree though that it is in no way the same grace that we as the children of God enjoy.

Now as for any grace that may be given to the reprobate being purchased by Christ, I can no longer agree. Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that if Christ purchased this for the non-elect, it could certainly be implied that Christ died for someone who will not be saved. Help me along here.

 

[holyfool33]

the unregenerate are simply shown common grace which is nothing more the the rain and other things as scripture says God causes it to rain on the just and unjust.

 

[MW]

I think these two believing Thomases state the matter with true biblical insight.

Thomas Watson: “Wicked men have mercies by Providence, not by virtue of a covenant; with God’s leave, not with his love. But such as are in covenant have their mercies sweetened with God’s love, and they swim to them in the blood of Christ.”

Thomas Manton: “we can draw no argument of love or hatred from outward things. Many ungodly men may prosper in this world; they cannot say therefore that God loves them. Prisoners have an allowance till the time of their execution, so have carnal men; God in the bounty of his providence gives them a great many comforts and mercies in the present life.”