God desires to save all men from different orders

"That no one but a man deprived of his common sense and common judgment can believe that salvation was ordained by the secret counsel of God equally and indiscriminately for all men. The true meaning of Paul, however, in the passage now under consideration is perfectly clear and intelligible to every one who is not determined on contention. The apostle is exhorting that all solemn 'supplication, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men: for kings and for all that are in authority.' And because there were, in that age, so many and such wrathful and bitter enemies of the Church, Paul, to prevent despair from hindering the prayers of the faithful, hastens to meet their distresses by earnestly entreating them to be instant in prayer 'for all men,' and especially 'for all those in authority.' 'For (said the apostle) God will have all men to be saved.' Who does not see that the apostle is here speaking of orders of men rather than of individuals?" - John Calvin, The Eternal Predestination of God

Predestination done before the consideration of works?

"Paul concludes that no respect of works existed in God's election of His people, because He preferred Jacob to his brother before they were born, and before they had done 'either good or evil.' But these opponents of election, to make good their doctrine, that those were chosen of God whom some mark of goodness distinguished from the reprobate, would make it appear that God foresaw what disposition there would be in each person to receive or to reject offered grace." - John Calvin, The eternal Predestination of God

John Calvin on the work of Christ

"'All that the Father giveth Me shall come unto Me; and him that cometh unto Me, I will in no wise cast out.' here we have three things, briefly indeed, but most perspicuously expressed. First, that all who come unto Christ were before given unto Him by the Father; Second, that those who were thus given unto Him were delivered, as it were, from the hand of the Father into the hand of the Son, that they may be truly His; thirdly, that Christ is the sure keeper of all those whom the Father delivered over to His faithful custody and care, for the very end that He might not suffer one of them to perish. Now if a question be raised as to the beginning of faith, Christ here gives the answer, when He says that those who believe, therefore believe because they were given unto Him by the Father." - John Calvin, The Eternal Predestination of God

John Calvin on the Early Church Fathers

"In his reply he remarks that before the heresy of Pelagius, the fathers of the primitive Church did not deliver their opinions so deeply and accurately upon predestination; which reply, indeed, is the truth. And he adds: 'What need is there for us to search the works of those writers, who, before the heresy of Pelagius arose, found no necessity for devoting themselves to this question, so difficult of solution? Had such necessity arisen, and had they been compelled to reply to the enemies of predestination, they would doubtless have done so.' This remark of Augustine is a prudent one, and a wise one. For if the enemies of the grace of God had not worried Augustine himself, he never would have devoted so much labour (as he himself confesses) to the discussion of God's election." - John Calvin, The eternal Predestination of God

No difference between sinners

"It is evident, that he who prayed to Jesus on the cross, saw no difference betwixt himself and his fellow criminal." Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio

The two criminals on the cross were criminals

Let us, then, observe what was the faith of this transgressor, as it appeared in the expression of it. No difference filled his mind, or took place in his thoughts, but rhat immense one betwixt himself, a sinner of the vilest class, and the perfections of righteousness shining forth in a person of the highest dignity, under the severest trials. This is the proper point of view at which sinful men come to the knowledge of the true God. To this point was Paul, that eminent guardian of virtue and holiness, reduced, when he became a Christian. - Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio

Making your own salvation certain does not mean others make it certain

2 Peter 1:10, Gordon Clark says, "To make my divinely decreed election certain to or for myself is simply a matter of assurance. Simply, not because the doctrine of assurance is guaranteed to be devoid of problems; but because it does not face the impossible problem of making God's decree more certain than God could make it. The text deals with assurance. Kierkegaard, who should never be trusted, has a good point, though even in this case he exaggerates, when he says we must in humility always be certain of others' salvation and always doubtful of our own. The idea of becoming assured of one's own salvation is perfectly Scriptural, and part of the method is self-examination. Therefore one commentator's view that we cannot make our own election sure, on the ground that only God can grant assurance, is without foundation; for though it is God who gives us certainty, he does this through several means. The same commentator's suggestion that Peter refers here to our making our election certain to others by our good works is altogether implausible. The idea of assuring others cannot be found in the text. The middle voice means oneself. The second half of 1:10 clearly indicates the individualism of the argument. Furthermore, since God alone can see and judge the heart, another person, an observer, can never be made certain by my good works. These are observable because external; my internal motives, an indispensable element in my moral standing, the observer cannot see." New Heaven, New Earth

Takes more irrationalism to believe in Scofield

On Revelation 2: "These messages are just plain letters to the seven churches with their consequent lessons to all churches in all places and times. Some extravagant notions have been entertained in regard to these messages. Dr. C.I. Scofield says : 'The messages to the seven churches have a prophetic application, as disclosing seven phases of the spiritual history of the church from, say, A.D. 96 to the end. It is incredible that in a prophecy covering the church period ther...e should be no such foreview. These messages must contain that foreview if it is in the book at all; for no church is mentioned after 3:22. These messages do present an exact foreview of the spiritual history of the church and in this precise order. Ephesus gives the general state at the date of the writing; Smyrna, the period of the great persecution; Pergamos, the church settled down in the world 'where Satan's throne is,' after the conversion of Constantine, say A.D. 316.Thyatira is the Papacy, 500 to 1500 A.D. Sardis is the Protestant Reformation whose works were not 'fulfilled.' Philadelphia is whatever bears clear testimony to the Word and Name in the time of self satisfied profession represented by Laudicea.' . . .
If Dr. Scofield finds such a scheme in these chapters, he must have use of a miscroscope that ordinary men do not possess. This is all sheer invention. By these methods one can prove anything; and find anything in the Scriptures whether it is there or no. Such interpretations are almost as rationalistic as the rationalism they condemn. A recent writer gives us an example in his reference to Joseph: Joseph is a type of Christ; He marries Asenath, a type of the Gentile church. This occurs before Joseph's brethren arrive in Egypt and become reconciled to him; thus the conversion of the Gentiles must precede the conversion of the Jews which will occur only when they meet Christ at his second advent. To make such farfetched arguments, is the extreme of allegorical interpretation. We might proceed with this kind of argument and say that since Joseph died and left his brethren in bondage, therefore the conversion of the Jews will result in their servitude to Satan; - a reduction and absurdum, but quite as legitimate." - David S. Clark, The Message From Patmos

What to believe? The Truth!

"The gospel proposes nothing to be believed by us, but what is infallibly true, whether we believe it or not. For shall our own unbelief make the fsith or veracity of God of none effect? Far be it! Heaven and earth shall pass away but not one of his words shall fall to thebground. The gospel, which foretells the final perdition of so many of its hearers, so many seriously and zealously exercised about it, can never warrant us to persuade every one who hears it, to believe that Christ died for him; unless we shall say that Christ died for every individual of mankind, and consequently, that none of mankind owe their salvation wholly to his death." - Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio

Faith is belief in the Truth

"But it is now time that we should hear Aspasio. He tells us, 'Faith is a real persuasion that Christ died for me.'
This account of faith given us by Aspasio, seems to me somewhat to resemble the arch of a bridge thrown over a river, having the one end settled on a rock, and the other on sand or mud, so needing a great many subsidiary props to support its own weight; and which after all is liable to be undermined by every land-flood or swell of the river; and therefore, the t...raveller had need to be cautious how he ventures upon it.
That Christ died, that he gave his life a ransom for many, is indeed a truth fully ascertained in the Scriptures, and established there, firm as a rock, for the relief of the shipwrecked and the desperate; yeah, many finding rest here, have been determined to follow Christ, at all hazards, having no other reason to give for their attachment, but, Thou has the wrods of eternal life.
That Christ died for me, is a point not so easily settled: and, therefore, I am not surprised to find Aspasio laboring hard, with much eloquence and skill, to establish it by a variety of props; and after all very ready, not only to pardon, but to sympathize with his friend upon his remissness and inactivity to come up to it." - Robert Sandaman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio

Error in our Faith

"To believe in vain, then, is to hold, along with the truth, some error which undermines it, makes it void and of no effect. And the same Apostles shows us at large, in his epistle to the Galatians, that however zealous Christians we may be, if we add to Christ's death any requistic whatsoever in the matter of acceptance with God, Christ shall profit us nothing, Christ is become of no effect unto us. In general, the apostles ascribe every opinion or practice which they condemn to some error in faith, or a lie held in the place of the truth, 1 John i,8, and ii,4." -Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio

We believe the truth in the same sense as the Apostle believed it

"Every one who believes the same truth which the apostles believed, has equally precious faith with them. He has unfeigned faith, and shall assuredly be saved. If any man's faith be found insufficient to save him, it is owing to this, that what he believed for truth, was not the very same thing that the apostles believed, but some lie connected with, or dressed up in the form of truth. So this faith can do him no good; because, however seriously and sincerely he believes, yet that which he believes is false, and therefore it cannot save him. There is but one genuine truth that can save men.
To illustrate this matter, let it be remembered that the saving truth which the apostles believed was, That Jesus is the Christ. The apostles had one uniform fixed sense to these words, and the whole New Testament is writ to ascertain to us in what sense they understood them. Every one who believes that Jesus is the Christ in a different sense from the apostles, or who maintains anything in connection with these words subversive of their real meaning, believes a falsehood, so his faith cannot save him. In the days of the apostles many affirmed along with them, that Jesus is the Christ, who yet meant very differently from them. The far greater part of Christendom will affirm in like manner; yet we shall not easily find many who, when they come to explain themselves, have the same meaning with the apostles. Let us, then, lay aside all questions about faith, or how a man believes; and let the only question be What does he believe? what sense does he put on the apostolic doctrine about the way of salvation?" - Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio

The Primacy of the Truth

Also Clark says, "The primacy of the intellect, then, cannot be a power automatically exercised over the volition regarded as a separate faculty. This would violate the unity of the person. Instead of the phrase 'THE PRIMACY OF THE INTELLECT', the essential idea might better be expressed as 'THE PRIMACY OF THE TRUTH'. And the primacy is one of authority rather than of psychological power. The older forms of expression generate an old perplexity dating from Platonic dialogues. On the assumption that the intellect dominates the will, it would follow that no one does wrong knowingly. All evil is due to ignorance, and education guarantees correct conduct. The ambiguities hidden in this apparently simple language are enormous. But if we speak of the primacy of truth, we can avoid, even if we do not solve, these perplexities. The primacy of truth will mean that our voluntary actions ought to conform to the truth. Obviously sometimes they do not. If it is true that worshiping God is good, we ought to worship him. Perhaps we choose not to worship God, but the truth is superior in right to our will. This way of putting the matter extends as well to the voluntary choice of belief. We may choose to believe a truth, or we may choose to believe a lie. Both types of choice actually occur. But the primacy of truth means that we ought to believe the truth and we ought not to believe the lie." - Emphasis is mine. Found in his Three R's

The elect will love the truth while the reprobate remain at enmity

"In the first intimation of the saving truth to fallen man, is hinted a distinction of mankind into two classes, under the designations of the seed of the woman, and the seed of the serpent: And this hint is sufficiently illustrated to us in other places of Scripture. Thence it appears, that in the former class are comprehended all with whom the Son of God took part in flesh and blood, and who, partaking of his Spirit, are joined to him as members of one body to the head: so, according to the apostolic style, make in him one new man - And of every member of this body it may be said, He that is joined to the Lord, is one spirit. This account of the seed of the woman is supported by the like account given by the Apostle Paul of the seed of Abraham, Gal. iv. The spirit by which this one body is animated, is distinguished from every other, under the titles of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of the Truth: and, according to the Scripture, this Spirit is God. In the latter class are comprehended all who have the same temper of mind which began in the first oppose of the truth, who borrows his name from the serpent, which he made use of in deceiving man. The Scripture declares all such to be under his influence, and to be conducted by him, in their opposition to the truth: so he is called the Spirit that now worketh in the children of unbelief or disobedience. And the union of all who are influenced by him, is to be seen in nothing else but their enmity to the saving truth." - Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio

Justified by Faith alone apart from works

"We are likewise told, that faith has two hands; one for taking home Christ to ourselves, and another for giving a way ourselves to Christ. But if faith must be called an instrument, and if it be at the same time maintained that justification comes by faith only; then I am at full liberty to affirm, that he who is possessed of the instrument, hand or mouth, is already justified without regard to his using the instrument, his taking or giving with the hand, or recieving with the mouth. Thus the artifice by which they would impose upon us may be very easily discerned." Robert Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio

Loraine Boettner against Supralapsarianism

"It is not in harmony with the Scripture ideas of God that innocent men, men who are not contemplated as sinners, should be foreordained to eternal misery and death. The decrees concerning the saved ‘and the lost should not be looked upon as based merely on abstract sovereignty. God is truly sovereign, but this sovereignty is not exercised in an arbitrary way. Rather it is a sovereignty exercised in harmony with His other attributes, especially His justice, holiness, and wisdom. God cannot commit sin; and in that respect He is limited, although it would be more accurate to speak of His inability to commit sin as a perfection. There is, of course, mystery in connection with either system; but the supralapsarian system seems to pass beyond mystery and into contradiction.‘" - Loraine Boettner


Now a couple of weeks ago I posted a link of what appeared to be from Loraine Boettner's work. His conclusion is that the Supralapsarian system seems to pass beyond mystery and into contradiction. My question is how? From what he just wrote it is really difficult to see where the Supralapsarian leads to such things. The Supralapsarian need I say it more than once says that God choice was apart from any foreseen works whether those works were good or bad. That God is not at liberty to dispense His grace as He pleased is quite the contrary of what the Bible says. God at some point in time decided to create. I find it interesting that he speaks against Abstract sovereignty - I also wonder what he means by such things, especially when he proclaims that this is mystery. By Abstract sovereignty he does not define but merely speaks of it. Saying that God is Simple is also abstract does it make it meaningless or mysterious? Of course not. Some theologians do not believe in such qualifying rules.

The Lord who bought Whom? Limited to the Church of God alone made up of His elected people

"Acts 20:28 reads, 'feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.' This verse is often used to show that Jesus, who shed his blood, was himself God, the second Person of the Trinity. But for the present purpose let us note that his blood purchased the church. Liberals will complain at the base notion of a commercial transaction, but Paul, whose words they are, was never troubled on this score. The church had to be purchased and Jesus bought it: 'Ye are bought with a price' (1 Cor. 6:20 and 7:23); and 2 Peter warns against false prophets and false teachers who deny 'the Lord that bought them.' If, as Dr. Hendry claims, Christ did not have to fulfill any condition in order to save us, why did he have to be crucified? Why indeed did he have to come to earth at all?" - Gordon Clark, What do Presbyterians Believe?

God is soveriegn over both Good and Bad

"For if you hesitate to believe, or are too proud to acknowledge, that God foreknows and wills all things, not contingently, but necessarily and immutably, how can you believe, trust and rely on His promises?" - Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will

Why the faith we preach is particular

The saving power of faith resides thus not in itself, but in the Almighty Saviour on whom it rests. It is never on account of its formal
nature as a psychic act that faith is conceived in Scripture to be
saving,—as if this frame of mind or attitude of heart were itself a
virtue with claims on God for reward, or at least especially pleasing to
Him (either in its nature or as an act of obedience) and thus
predisposing Him to favour, or as if it brought the soul into an
attitude of receptivity or of sympathy with God, or opened a channel of
communication from Him. It is not faith that saves, but faith in Jesus Christfaith in any other saviour, or in this or that philosophy or human
conceit (Col. 2:16, 18, 1 Tim. 4:1), or in any other gospel than that of
Jesus Christ and Him as crucified (Gal. 1:8, 9), brings not salvation
but a curse. It is not, strictly speaking, even faith in Christ that
saves, but Christ that saves through faith. The saving power resides
exclusively, not in the act of faith or the attitude of faith or the
nature of faith, but in the object of faith; and in this the whole
biblical representation centres, so that we could not more radically
misconceive it than by transferring to faith even the smallest fraction
of that saving energy which is attributed in the Scriptures solely to
Christ Himself.
....Biblical Doctrines, vol. 2 of The Works of Benjamin B. Warfield (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1932; repr., Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000),
504

God and Evil

I read a work by some arminians called Whosoever Will - edited by David Allen and Steven Lemke. Lousy bunch of non-sense those arminians. Anyways one chapter has me smirking. The one on God and evil. As i skimmed through the section i thought well these arminians must make a buck somehow. Anyways their work was hardly scholarly. My question is how they answer the problem of evil if there is such issue for them. Arminianism and molinism do not solve either and where i come from you are part of the problem as these men are or part of the solution.