Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Is it the duty of all who hear the Gospel to believe savingly in Christ?
Also, before 1700, were there any who denied this?
I cannot think of a time where men were allowed to dis-obey their Creator.
Is it the duty of all who hear the Gospel to believe savingly in Christ?
Also, before 1700, were there any who denied this?
What are the reasons for your answer? Biblical support?
What are the implication for evangelism?
Is it the duty of all who hear the Gospel to believe savingly in Christ?
O boy will I get into trouble but my answer is that it is not the duty of all who hear the gospel to savingly believe in Christ. I will now go and hide
What, Richard, is their duty? non-saving belief?
What, Richard, is their duty? non-saving belief?
Their duty is to believe the testimony of God made known to them i.e. Jesus that is the Messiah. You will, I am sure, be aware of the many types of faith we find in Scripture and that the Puritans helpfully point out, such as an historical faith.
What, Richard, is their duty? non-saving belief?
Their duty is to believe the testimony of God made known to them i.e. Jesus that is the Messiah. You will, I am sure, be aware of the many types of faith we find in Scripture and that the Puritans helpfully point out, such as an historical faith.
Those who have only an external revelation of Christ by the ministry of the word, are obliged to believe no more than that which is included in that revelation, that Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah, who died and rose again, and is the Saviour of sinners, etc., but not that he died for them, or that he is their Saviour.
There is also the issue of saving faith and of what does it consist? Too many in the Reformed churches believe that saving faith is but a mere intellectual assent to the truth of the gospel, others would accept that saving faith is more than this but would remove any subjective element of saving faith.
Is it the duty of all who hear the Gospel to believe savingly in Christ?
O boy will I get into trouble but my answer is that it is not the duty of all who hear the gospel to savingly believe in Christ. I will now go and hide
We've covered this ground before - but this is an interesting twist.
What, Richard, is their duty? non-saving belief?
Perhaps before this discussion goes much further we ought to define "duty".
And if this is their duty (their only duty) what benefits to them are derived from doing what is their duty?
By the way, you're setting up a strawman here. Nobody here agrees with the error that saving faith is mere assent to historical propositions. Let's deal with the present reality.
Would you call yourself a hyper-calvinist?
Would you call yourself a hyper-calvinist?
Nope. Let us not forget that John Owen went further than Calvin but would we call Owen a hyper-Calvinist? I think not. What argument would you put forward to say that all those who hear the gospel are obligated to believe in Christ savingly?
In Jn.8 Or, Mt.23:3737 or this, 2 pet2
What else will save them from the wrath to come? Faith in Christ, saving faith, of course, is the only thing that can save them. Is this not properly put forth as an obligation upon all - i.e. if you would be saved, come to Christ? Why is this wrong to do? Why is it wrong to put this in terms of a requirement, or duty, that all men face? I'm really not sure of the cause of your objection, Richard.
Is it that you don't like the word "duty", Richard? If this is just semantics concerning the word "duty" let's get beyond that. What is the implication that you take issue with, if we say "everyone is obligated, or has the duty, to come to Christ in saving faith." What do you think that does to harm evangelism? And - how do you think evangelism is properly conducted in light of your statement that some subset of people (I take it you mean the non-elect) are NOT obligated to believe on Christ?
Chapter VII:III. Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein He freely offers unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe.
It seems the Divines believed in 'duty-faith' unless I am not understanding them properly.
Chapter VII:III. Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein He freely offers unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe.
Richard,
I find that you're missing a very important piece of what the Gospel really is by focusing too much on how ministers present it and not enough upon what the Truth of it represents with respect to a man's status before God. Incidentally, your quotes of Gill only reinforce that there is much that I disagree with that he wrote.
If you read the book of Romans beginning from Romans 1, Paul states that he is not ashamed of the Gospel because the righteousness of God is revealed in it. In fact, it is only the Gospel that rightly acknowledges the righteousness of God. It is no mistake that Paul launches into the unrighteousness of men who supress the knowledge of God.
Now, we can certainly agree that a fallen man is not going to embrace the Gospel but, put another way, all we're acknowledging is that a fallen man is not going to acknowledge the righteousness of God. He will willfully and wantonly *suppress* God's righteousness.
The question is: Does he have a right to do so? Of course not.
In fact, as God's creature he *is* required to acknowledge the righteousness of His creator. It is the very reason God's wrath is poured out on him. It is the very reason he will be judged.
To deny his duty to believe the Gospel is to deny his duty to acknowledge God's righteousness and, hence, is to call into question whether or not God is righteous in condemning him.
Would you call yourself a hyper-calvinist?
Nope. Let us not forget that John Owen went further than Calvin but would we call Owen a hyper-Calvinist? I think not. What argument would you put forward to say that all those who hear the gospel are obligated to believe in Christ savingly?
The term Hyper-Calvinism refers primarily to a theological position that historically arose from within the Calvinist tradition among the early English Particular Baptists in the mid 1700's. It can be seen in the teachings of men like Joseph Hussey (d. 1726), Lewis Wayman (d. 1764), John Brine (d. 1765), and to some extent in John Gill (d. 1771).
It is called Hyper-Calvinism by its critics, who maintain that it deviates from the biblical gospel by (1) denying that the call of the gospel to repent and believe is universal, i.e. for all alike, and (2) denying that the unregenerate (natural) man has a duty to repent and believe in Christ for salvation.
In fact, as God's creature he *is* required to acknowledge the righteousness of His creator.
It is the very reason God's wrath is poured out on him.
It is the very reason he will be judged.
To deny his duty to believe the Gospel is to deny his duty to acknowledge God's righteousness
and, hence, is to call into question whether or not God is righteous in condemning him.
Richard - if not all are duty bound to believe the Gospel (which means truly believe, truly put faith in Christ, etc. and so forth) then what of those who are free of that duty, that obligation? You have said that they are duty bound ONLY to believe that Christ is the Son of God, etc. - that they are duty bound to have "historical" faith.
What accrues to them (you've never answered this question, unless I missed it in your large extracts from other authors) if they DO obey and do their duty? What good does that do them? If they've done all their duty, then what?
Fact is, Richard, they are duty bound to believe Christ, and ON him, and come to faith, else they perish.