How about a talk about reprobation?

Status
Not open for further replies.

daveb

Puritan Board Sophomore
[quote:f1803fd1b3="webmaster"]Interestingly enough, when Particular Baptists were "penning" a copy of the Savoy Declaration for the 1689 Confession, they decided, for whatever reason, to leave out reprobation altogether.[/quote:f1803fd1b3]

I've always found that interesting. Does anyone know [b:f1803fd1b3]why[/b:f1803fd1b3] they did this? Was there any reason behind it or was it just a big mistake?
 

C. Matthew McMahon

Christian Preacher
David,

You know, I have no idea why they did that. You would think being Particular Baptists and believing limited atonement (particular redemption, thus particular Baptists) they woudl believe reprobation?!

I think it was a major blunder. They did not improve on the Savoy Declaration, but rather chopped it up in many ways.

For those interested: the Savoy Declaration was the Independent's copy of the WCF which ONLY added a chapter on the preaching of the Gospel and changed the chapter on Ecclesiology. The Baptists took this document and copied it, but changed a whole number chapters. One change, a mojor one, was to reprobation. Even Particular Baptists see this as a major mistake. Probably, in one of the Puritan History books, there is info, but I have notaken time to research it.
 

irishcalvinist

Inactive User
Deuteronomy 10:17-18 - God's Saving Love

[size=16:a23f7ed3bf]VanVos:

I thought Professor Hanko from the PRC did a wonderful job in discussing Deuteronomy 10:18 in our monthly church publication the 'Covenant Reformed News.' (www.cprf.co.uk/crnews.htm) He suggests that this verse is referring to the gentile believers in the Old Testament that were grafted into the nation of Israel (Rahab, Ruth, the Gibeonites, Uriah, Araunah, etc.) The article can be found here on our churchwebsite: www.cprf.co.uk/crnews/crnjuly2003.htm#gods

If you have time to read the article, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the subject.

Reformed in Him,

Sean-[/size:a23f7ed3bf]
 

VanVos

Puritan Board Sophomore
I agree with Hanko's thoughts here, I think in context we see that God only loved the Nation of Israel verse 15, Amos 3:2, and these stranges were grafted in. In other words they joined the Old Covenant community and became recipients of God love for Israel.

Although I'm still a bit confused with ezekiel 18:23,32

VanVos
 

Learner

Puritan Board Freshman
This is in regard to the reason why the London Confession of Faith left out the clearer statements that the W. C. of F. has . I do not know the answer . I have never owned the book , but I read it about seven years ago . Does anyone have Samuel Waldron's commentary on the 1689 Baptist Confession ? Maybe that book sheds some light on this issue . I remember he took time to explain the differences the Baptist document had with the Westminster Confession . In the first draft of the Westminster Confession---did it leave out the plainer language it adopted later on ? Was there even a first draft which was later modified ?
 

irishcalvinist

Inactive User
I have heard two explanations regarding Ezekiel 18:23,32.

[size=16:3eb32c9ee1]VanVos:

I have heard two explanations regarding Ezekiel 18:23,32.

'Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?'

'For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.'

The first explanation seems to conclude that the elect are in view and this doesnt seem to do justice to the text. The second view is that God does not have pleasure in the death of the wicked in the sense that He is not a sadist. God does not inflict pain merely for the sake of inflicting pain. He does not delight in such sadistic counsel. He punishes the wicked because of sin and not merely because He delights in pain and suffering. This certainly seems to reconcile with other texts that indicate that God will laugh at the reprobate on the day of judgment (Psalm 2:4; 27:13; 59:8, etc.). Scripture also makes it clear that God has created the reprobate for the purpose of His own glory and to damn them in their sins (Proverbs 16:4).

God has pleasure if one 'should return from his ways, and live' because God always delights in objective righteousnes. But this does not say that it is God's will or delight to see the reprobate repent and believe or else God's will would most surely come to pass. 'For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.' (Proverbs 3:12) Where God says 'wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye'... this is would be like us asking our neighbor 'Why are you determined to go to hell' because of your wickedness. Is objective repentance and faith not pleasing in God's eyes that you have your heart set on going to hell. This passage offers no proof or evidence to the advocate of the 'free offer' that teaches that God dearly loves and desires the repentance of those whom He has already reprobated to hell. I would be interested to hear your own personal thoughts on these two verses when you have the time. Reformed in Him, Sean-[/size:3eb32c9ee1]
 

irishcalvinist

Inactive User
Last sermon you heard on the doctrine of 'reprobation'...

[size=16:efc3fdc3a7]Andrew:

(Out of sincere interest) when was the last sermon you heard on the doctrine of 'reprobation' in your church? and is it available to the public on cassette tape?

Reformed in Him,

Sean-[/size:efc3fdc3a7]
 

C. Matthew McMahon

Christian Preacher
[quote:da0218760b]I have heard two explanations regarding Ezekiel 18:23,32. [/quote:da0218760b]

One of the best treatments of this is in Greenhill's Geneva Series Commentary on Ezekiel.

Last time I heard about Reprobation was when I preached on it. :rolleyes:
 

Learner

Puritan Board Freshman
This is in reference to Matt's September 2nd post . This concerned the weak postion of the 1689 London Confession on reprobation .
In the Belgic Confession of 1561 , Article 16 says in part : ..." just in leaving others in the fall and perdition wherein they have involved themselves ." That's kinda weak . The Heidelberg catechism doesn't mention it , neither do the Helvetic Confessions , nor the 39 Articles of the Church of England . And the Westminster Confession really uses the softer idea of preterition . Reprobation , as such , needs to be strengthened in our various confessions of faith . They need modification .
 

fredtgreco

Vanilla Westminsterian
Staff member
[quote:f72f26a7e1="Learner"]This is in reference to Matt's September 2nd post . This concerned the weak postion of the 1689 London Confession on reprobation .
In the Belgic Confession of 1561 , Article 16 says in part : ..." just in leaving others in the fall and perdition wherein they have involved themselves ." That's kinda weak . The Heidelberg catechism doesn't mention it , neither do the Helvetic Confessions , nor the 39 Articles of the Church of England . And the Westminster Confession really uses the softer idea of preterition . Reprobation , as such , needs to be strengthened in our various confessions of faith . They need modification .[/quote:f72f26a7e1]

Have you ever wondered why all the Protestant Confessions of the Reformation (WCF, 1689, Savoy, Belgic, Heidelberg, Helvetic, etc.) have such a "weak" expression of reprobation? Could there be something theological and pastoral at work here?
 

Learner

Puritan Board Freshman
Hi Fred . You were saying that the reason why the various confessions were not so explicit [ my words , not yours ] may be thelogical and pastoral . Yes , so goes conventional thinking . Chapter 3 , section 8 which you quoted on your September 1st post has the " special prudence and care " qualifier . Of course we shouldn't enter into any doctrine with reckless care and abandon . However , even the doctrine of hell--eternal torments , in the confession did not have any disclaimer . Why the timidity over the teaching of reprobation ?
 

VanVos

Puritan Board Sophomore
Re: I have heard two explanations regarding Ezekiel 18:23,32

[quote:0c60e7e912="irishcalvinist"][size=16:0c60e7e912]VanVos:

I have heard two explanations regarding Ezekiel 18:23,32.

'Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?'

'For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.'

The first explanation seems to conclude that the elect are in view and this doesnt seem to do justice to the text. The second view is that God does not have pleasure in the death of the wicked in the sense that He is not a sadist. God does not inflict pain merely for the sake of inflicting pain. He does not delight in such sadistic counsel. He punishes the wicked because of sin and not merely because He delights in pain and suffering. This certainly seems to reconcile with other texts that indicate that God will laugh at the reprobate on the day of judgment (Psalm 2:4; 27:13; 59:8, etc.). Scripture also makes it clear that God has created the reprobate for the purpose of His own glory and to damn them in their sins (Proverbs 16:4).

God has pleasure if one 'should return from his ways, and live' because God always delights in objective righteousnes. But this does not say that it is God's will or delight to see the reprobate repent and believe or else God's will would most surely come to pass. 'For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.' (Proverbs 3:12) Where God says 'wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye'... this is would be like us asking our neighbor 'Why are you determined to go to hell' because of your wickedness. Is objective repentance and faith not pleasing in God's eyes that you have your heart set on going to hell. This passage offers no proof or evidence to the advocate of the 'free offer' that teaches that God dearly loves and desires the repentance of those whom He has already reprobated to hell. I would be interested to hear your own personal thoughts on these two verses when you have the time. Reformed in Him, Sean-[/size:0c60e7e912][/quote:0c60e7e912]

Thank you for your insight on Ezekiel 18, I agree with your thoughts. It seems to me that God does not delight to show wrath just for wrath sake, but in love for His own holiness He loves to show His justice Deut 28:63.

VanVos
 

fredtgreco

Vanilla Westminsterian
Staff member
[quote:43e87937f4="Learner"]Hi Fred . You were saying that the reason why the various confessions were not so explicit [ my words , not yours ] may be thelogical and pastoral . Yes , so goes conventional thinking . Chapter 3 , section 8 which you quoted on your September 1st post has the " special prudence and care " qualifier . Of course we shouldn't enter into any doctrine with reckless care and abandon . However , even the doctrine of hell--eternal torments , in the confession did not have any disclaimer . Why the timidity over the teaching of reprobation ?[/quote:43e87937f4]

Because the doctrine of hell drives man to Christ, even when handled badly. The doctrine of reprobation, when handled badly, provides men with excuse not to come to Christ.

(As usual) I think that the Westminster divines are more on target with this issue that others today.
 

Learner

Puritan Board Freshman
As I said , even the doctrine of hell did not have any disclaimers (as I recall ) in the W. C. of F.
Tell me how the teaching of reprobation can be misused . I mean if a preacher or layman is telling people that they are reprobates and consigned to hell . That would certainly be an abuse . But to teach that some folks have been selected by God before the foundation of the world and that therefore others have been foreordained to hell on account of their sin --- I think people would be scared and fear God . They would want to run to Him for safety--- salvation .
 

Learner

Puritan Board Freshman
In addition , is it a valid excuse to think I may be reprobate , salvation was not decreed for me ? That is filmsy . It is just that , an excuse , not a reason to reject the perfect sacrifice of Christ .
 

fredtgreco

Vanilla Westminsterian
Staff member
[quote:628e8f722a="Learner"]As I said , even the doctrine of hell did not have any disclaimers (as I recall ) in the W. C. of F.
Tell me how the teaching of reprobation can be misused . I mean if a preacher or layman is telling people that they are reprobates and consigned to hell . That would certainly be an abuse . But to teach that some folks have been selected by God before the foundation of the world and that therefore others have been foreordained to hell on account of their sin --- I think people would be scared and fear God . They would want to run to Him for safety--- salvation .[/quote:628e8f722a]

Actually, often the exact opposite happens. Men start to think that they might be reprobate, and that there is no use in seeking Christ. Men outside of Christ begin to focus on election and whether they are elect instead of Christ - the Bible never calls upon us to consider our election outside of the context in which the divines place it. We are only to consider election in the context of a confirmation of the promises of God. The Bible considers reprobation in the context of the logical necessity of the doctrine of election. It does not say, "Esau I have hated" but rather "Jacob I have loved and Esau I have hated."
 

Learner

Puritan Board Freshman
Besides , isn't there an overlap between hell and reprobation ? Someone could conjure-up reasons a-plenty that their name probably wasn't written in the Lamb's Book of Life , that hell is their destiny . Another one : " I have been too great of a sinner , God won't accept me . " There are multiple excuses to discard Bible claims . Every Bible doctrine presented to some people is cast aside for this or that cause . Man-made excuses are not going to really prevent an elect one to reject the message-- ultimately .
 

Learner

Puritan Board Freshman
I know that reprobation is subordinate to election . And first things should be first . People are in need of Christ . They need redemption through His blood alone for their sins which have divided them from God . These things should be taught first . First the milk stage --- they need to repent and believe ( also vice-versa ) . The Lord will give His own both faith and repentance .
I still stand on my repeated refrain regarding "excuses " .
 

Learner

Puritan Board Freshman
Oops ! This concerns my Sept. 13th , 3:35 post . I said at the end :" Man-made excuses are not going to really prevent an elect one to reject the message --- ultimately . " Instead of the word "prevent " substitute the word "cause " .
 

Learner

Puritan Board Freshman
Scripture

These are just some passages dealing with the subject at-hand .


Proverbs 16:4 The Lord works out everything for His own end , even the wicked for a day of disaster .

John 17:12 ...The one doomed to destruction ...

Romans 9:22 ...The objects of wrath prepared for destruction .

2 Corinthians 11:15 ...Their end will be what their actions deserve.

1 Thess. 5:9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath...

1 Peter 2:8 b ...They disbelieve the message--which is what they were destined for .

2 Peter 2 :3 b ... Their condemnation has been long hanging over them , and their destruction has not been sleeping .

Jude 4 ... men... who were before of old ordained to this condemnation .

2 Peter 2:17 b and Jude 13 b ... For whom blackest darkness has been reserved forever .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top