# How about a talk about reprobation?



## Learner (May 19, 2004)

I looked at some former discussions on this topic.Maybe it's time to bring it up again.Most of you are in Reformed churches.Have you ever heard a message devoted to this doctrine?Or was it merely mentioned in a passing fashion(no
pun intented)?
Do you believe in double predestination?Is it &quot;double or nothing?&quot;Does God desire that the reprobate turn to Him?
We know that he does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked,but does that infer(imply?I get them confused)that He
wants to save them?
Would an A.W.Pink (not many of his caliber walking around)be welcome into even so-called &quot;staunchly reformed&quot;
churches today?That is,knowing what he wrote on this subject in his &quot;Sov.of God&quot; classic?Despite what Iain Murray
contends Pink still held to those beliefs late in his life.(&quot;The Sov.of God&quot;was written in 1918).
I'm just tossing this ball out there.I'll step back and listen in.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (May 19, 2004)

[quote:27a776f389][i:27a776f389]Originally posted by Learner[/i:27a776f389]
I looked at some former discussions on this topic.Maybe it's time to bring it up again.Most of you are in Reformed churches.Have you ever heard a message devoted to this doctrine?Or was it merely mentioned in a passing fashion(no
pun intented)?
[/quote:27a776f389]
I've never heard a topical sermon on it but I have heard expository sermons when the text is talking about it (i.e Romans 9). 
[quote:27a776f389]
Do you believe in double predestination?Is it &quot;double or nothing?&quot; [/quote:27a776f389]
Can it be any other way? If you choose some, you obviously have not chosen the others. 
[quote:27a776f389]
Does God desire that the reprobate turn to Him?
We know that he does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked,but does that infer(imply?I get them confused)that He
wants to save them?[/quote:27a776f389]
God requires in His Word that the reprobate turn to Him and promises salvation unto to all who will believe. But he has chosen not to save them because in His good pleasure He has passed them over. Their inability to repent and believe does not negate their responsibility to repent and believe. 
[quote:27a776f389]
Would an A.W.Pink (not many of his caliber walking around)be welcome into even so-called &quot;staunchly reformed&quot;
churches today?[/quote:27a776f389]
I don't think my church would have a problem with Pink preaching there so long as the Presbytery approved.


----------



## Christopher (May 19, 2004)

I would second what sailor has said and further add that when He passes over them it is not a passive &quot;whops I missed you so now you go to hell&quot; but he created these folks for that purpose, His glory in their damnation. They are &quot;vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.&quot; From eternity passed they were predestined for damnation and in history God hardens them to Himself by turning them over to their sinful desires which they gladly accept and would have it no other way. Again, although they were made to be vessels for wrath, the Bible strictly warns against attributing sinful responsibility on God for their damnation, it is man's alone.


----------



## Ianterrell (May 19, 2004)

I think what has been said by Patrick and Chris is right on the money. I think it helps to understand God's decree. God has ordained the ends and the means the ends. Secondly we must understand our position as creatures. [b:9d9f448d93]We[/b:9d9f448d93] do not no who the vessels of wrath or vessels of mercy are necessarily we must be faithful in what we do know that the gospel of God is the power of salvation to those who believe.


----------



## raderag (May 19, 2004)

[quote:b980043114][i:b980043114]Originally posted by Learner[/i:b980043114]
Have you ever heard a message devoted to this doctrine?Or was it merely mentioned in a passing fashion(no 
pun intented)? [/quote:b980043114]

Funny, that is what last weeks sermon was about.

The Pastor talked about Rom 8 and what is wrong with the message that &quot;God loves you and has a wonderful plan for you.&quot;

My take on it is that God doesn't appreciate that the reprobate hate Him, and disobey them, but doesn't plan on converting them.

I think that is similiar to the two wills by Pink.


----------



## Irishcat922 (May 19, 2004)

The Lord hath made all things for himself, yea, even the wicked for the day of evil. Proverbs 16:4


----------



## Preach (May 19, 2004)

Everything that has been stated so far seems to be in line with the Scriptures. But let us get to the heart of the issue. Does God desire every individual sinner to be saved? I am not talking about the decree from eternity within the counsel of the ontological Trinity. I am talking about the free offer of the Gospel. Does God set the free offer of the Gosperl to sinners in general, or to individuals? If He does set it forth to individuals, in what way is it free?


----------



## Puritan Sailor (May 19, 2004)

[quote:75189197f1][i:75189197f1]Originally posted by Preach[/i:75189197f1]
Everything that has been stated so far seems to be in line with the Scriptures. But let us get to the heart of the issue. Does God desire every individual sinner to be saved? I am not talking about the decree from eternity within the counsel of the ontological Trinity. I am talking about the free offer of the Gospel. Does God set the free offer of the Gosperl to sinners in general, or to individuals? If He does set it forth to individuals, in what way is it free? [/quote:75189197f1]
There are no conflicting desires in God. If God desired to saved teh reprobate then they would be saved. The Gospel is a fact . If they believe they will be saved. If they come to Christ, he will receive them. These are promises and are true regardless of the response of the hearer. Once the reprobate hears them he is obligated to respond in faith just as the elect are.


----------



## satz (May 19, 2004)

i remember reading an article on the web ( i think it was by john piper) where the author suggested that God desires that all men be saved but has decreed that only some be saved. What would you say to that?


ps. its been a while since i read it so if i have misrepresented the article , my apologies!


----------



## KayJay (May 19, 2004)

Emme, no you haven't misrepresented the article. I was actually about to post and ask what people thought about it...(I hope I haven't already and forgot).

Yep - the article is by John Piper entitled &quot;Are there Two Wills in God?&quot; and it can be accessed from monergism

Basically the idea Piper portrays is that God wants all men to be saved but he also desires His own glory (and so he must demonstrate mercy AND justice)...the way I understood it was that though He desired both when it comes down to it He couldn't have both so the desire for His own glory wins out...Piper doesn't say it but that is the sense I come away with. But isn't that what &quot;common grace&quot; is all about anyway? Maybe I'm way off...this topic is new and confusing to me so correct me if I'm wrong as graciously as you can! 

But I must say - for the most part I do love Piper though I don't really agree with the article...I don't think...it has been a while since I read it.

[Edited on 5-20-2004 by KayJay]


----------



## Ianterrell (May 19, 2004)

Piper covers this topic a little more extensively in the appendix titled &quot;Are there two wills in God&quot; in his book [i:8723201570]Desiring God[/i:8723201570]. 

There is the revealed will &quot;I do not desire the death of the sinner&quot; and the decreed objects of wrath. Are there complexities in the heart of God? God took pleasure in bruising his son, and yet he must have been enraged at the sins of those who slayed the perfect man. Christ's blood must have spoke like Abel's blood. It's difficult attain understanding here; God's thoughts are not our thoughts.


----------



## Dan.... (May 19, 2004)

[quote:1164aaba09]
I am talking about the free offer of the Gospel. Does God set the free offer of the Gosperl to sinners in general, or to individuals? If He does set it forth to individuals, in what way is it free?
[/quote:1164aaba09]

Here is a good article on this topic:

http://www.opc.org/GA/free_offer.html


----------



## Ranger (May 19, 2004)

Rom. 11:7 &quot;The chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened.&quot; 

I'll be overly simplistic, but I think it's clear that they didn't harden themselves.


----------



## JWJ (May 20, 2004)

*Piper is Wrong!*

I love John Piper. But his article and illustrations on this topic of Two Wills in God is flawed! Piper, like many others on this topic, make exegetical and hermeutical blunders. These blunders result in making God out to be a man-- a finite being with complex ambivalent emotions and desires. Moreover, these blunders result in or are the result of the erroneous doctrine of common grace. 

I would highly recommend Matthew's book on the Two Wills of God. 


Jim


----------



## blhowes (May 20, 2004)

I was just wondering if anybody else ever grapples with this teaching? I'm not talking about questioning God about it, but just about working on internalizing and understanding it in light of the sinner's accountability before God for his sins.

Have you ever tried to explain it to somebody who doesn't want to see the teaching from the scriptures? Have you been able to explain it in a way that made sense to them, or did you just tell them that its in the scriptures and refer them to Romans 9:20 - &quot;Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?...&quot;

Bob


----------



## Puritan Sailor (May 20, 2004)

Bob, its hard to talk to people who won't let the Scriptures speak for themselves. I just focus on the fact that all are guilty, so who are we to complain when God spares some and grants justice to others? It's his right as the righteous Judge to decide. We are in no position to judge Him.


----------



## blhowes (May 20, 2004)

Patrick,
That makes sense. I guess its no different than any other doctrine (sin, hell, etc.) that people don't want to hear. Bottom line is we just have to &quot;tell it like it is&quot;.

Having said that, its still a challenge to me, though reading it and believing it, to articulate it internally (and eventually externally) how man is totally unable, by God's design, to come to salvation, yet he's responsible and accountable for his sins. I'm glad the truths in the scriptures aren't contingent upon my depraved understanding.

Bob


----------



## Ianterrell (May 20, 2004)

The problem is based on our inferences. The tension between God's will being done comprising of our wills is difficult. You should read the WCF sections on providence they may help.


----------



## blhowes (May 20, 2004)

Ian,
Will do. Thanks.
Bob


----------



## Learner (May 20, 2004)

*The Plot Thickens...*

Does anyone agree with the Minority Report written by
William Young and Floyd E.Hamilton?It was in response to &quot;The Free Offer of the Gospel&quot;article.The whole situation came up to discredit Gordon Clark and possibly bar him from the ministry.He was not defrocked but chose to leave the O.P.C. rather than deal with the Van Till types who espoused
their particular philosophy.Needless to say I am in favor of the Minority Report's stance.Check out Dan Harris's post for the site to look at both articles.


----------



## Dan.... (May 20, 2004)

I agree with the majority report :thumbup:.

[Edited on 5-20-2004 by Dan....]


----------



## Ranger (May 20, 2004)

Could someone give me a link to the reports?


----------



## Learner (May 21, 2004)

*A Lot of Double-Talk in the M.R.*

Look with new eyes at that Majority Report.Contradictions abound.God is at cross-purposes with Himself if we are to believe the authors.Did you read their interpretation of 2 Peter 3:9 ?The word &quot;you&quot;does not refer to the elect ?There is an Arminianizing going on in that report.John Owen and some other Puritans would have refuted it.


----------



## irishcalvinist (Aug 13, 2004)

*Sermons on the Doctrine of Reprobation...*

[size=16:f7bf3be205]Reprobation is a most despised and hated doctrine today. I think we hear so little about the doctrine of reprobation because it completely contradicts the idea of God having a desire or will to save the reprobate. 
Our minister recently preached a number of sermons on the subject:

'Jacob Elected and Esau Reprobated'
http://www.cprf.co.uk/audio/m3u/romans9c.m3u
'God's Hatred of Esau' 
http://www.cprf.co.uk/audio/m3u/romans9d.m3u
'Is God's Reprobation Unrighteous?' 
http://www.cprf.co.uk/audio/m3u/romans9f.m3u[/size:f7bf3be205]


----------



## smhbbag (Aug 31, 2004)

Irishcalvinist:

listened to all three sermons last night - two big thumbs up on all of them. Very well done

(Not sure what thumbs up means over there - hope it's nothing too foul  )

:thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## VanVos (Aug 31, 2004)

Irish Calvinist does your pastor believe in particular grace?, and do you think that effects ones doctrine of the reprobate?

God bless VanVos


----------



## irishcalvinist (Sep 1, 2004)

*Calvin versus Pighius: Does God desire to save the reprobate*

[size=16:566acc6261]smhbbag:

Yes. Thank God for a Godly Minister in these dark days of apostasy. Before becoming a member of the Church here in N. Ireland, I had never heard a sermon on reprobation... and such an unhealthy and unbalanced diet is not good for the child of God. If you enjoyed those three... I would highly recommend a speech our minster gave on 'Calvin versus Pighius: Does God desire to save the reprobate?' Best speech I ever heard on the subject... I've listned to it a dozen times myself.

http://www.cprf.co.uk/audio/m3u/pighius.m3u

VanVos:

Yes we believe in 'particular grace' over against the error of 'common grace.' Ministers dont preach on reprobation anymore because it runs contrary to the idea of God having an earnest desire and love for the reprobate... so how can they preach that God reprobated and hated certain ones from eternity past and created them merely for His own glory through their eternal death and destruction? The one runs contrary to the other. How else does one explain why it is almost impossible to find sermons on reprobation in reformed churches? And usually when one finds such a very rare sermon... apologies abound. What are your thoughts?

Reformed in Him,

Sean-[/size:566acc6261]


----------



## fredtgreco (Sep 1, 2004)

I'm satisfied with this:

[quote:a89598f761="WCF 3.7-8"]VII. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extends or withholds mercy, as He pleases, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praised of His glorious justice.

VIII. The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that men, attending the will of God revealed in His Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election. So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God; and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the Gospel.[/quote:a89598f761]

But then again, you weren't surprised at that, were you? :bs2:


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Sep 1, 2004)

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.


----------



## VanVos (Sep 1, 2004)

*Re: Calvin versus Pighius: Does God desire to save the repro*

[quote:9cab8423af]

VanVos:

Yes we believe in 'particular grace' over against the error of 'common grace.' Ministers dont preach on reprobation anymore because it runs contrary to the idea of God having an earnest desire and love for the reprobate... so how can they preach that God reprobated and hated certain ones from eternity past and created them merely for His own glory through their eternal death and destruction? The one runs contrary to the other. How else does one explain why it is almost impossible to find sermons on reprobation in reformed churches? And usually when one finds such a very rare sermon... apologies abound. What are your thoughts?

Reformed in Him,

Sean [/quote:9cab8423af]

I think particular grace is the right position, but what do you do with verses like Deut 10:18, do you interpret that as particular grace inlight of verse 15. Also I'm not sure about Ezk 18:23,32. 

VanVos

P.S. Actually I believe Matthew McMahon (webmaster) did some good work on this. http://www.apuritansmind.com/CD/TwoWillsBookCD.htm


----------



## daveb (Sep 1, 2004)

[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 (Sep 2, 2004)

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 (Sep 2, 2004)

*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 (Sep 2, 2004)

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


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Sep 2, 2004)

In defense of common grace, I offer the following article by John Murray:

http://www.sounddoctrine.net/LIBRARY/Modern Day Reform Teaching/John Murray/Common_Grace.htm


----------



## Learner (Sep 2, 2004)

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 ?


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Sep 2, 2004)

Actually Samuel Waldron says the same thing. "I do not know why."


----------



## irishcalvinist (Sep 4, 2004)

*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 (Sep 4, 2004)

*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 (Sep 4, 2004)

[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.


----------



## Learner (Sep 5, 2004)

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 (Sep 5, 2004)

[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 (Sep 6, 2004)

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 (Sep 12, 2004)

*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 (Sep 12, 2004)

[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 (Sep 12, 2004)

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 (Sep 12, 2004)

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 (Sep 12, 2004)

[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 (Sep 12, 2004)

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 (Sep 12, 2004)

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 (Sep 13, 2004)

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 (Sep 13, 2004)

*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 .


----------

