FAQ – The Atonement.
Q. 1. “John Murray asserts that there is a
sense in which ‘Christ died for non-elect persons’ (Collected Writings, vol. 1, p. 68).”
[The] holy Scriptures are completely silent with
regard to any non-saving benefits which flowed from the atonement to the
reprobate; and those who presume to be teachers of the holy Scriptures would do
well to imitate that silence and not set about to build such a doctrinal
superstructure upon the foundation of an incidental statement. (Rev. Matthew Winzer, “Murray on the Free
Offer: A Review”)
Check out also the following response by Prof.
Herman C. Hanko:
#############################################
Q. 2. “Christ’s satisfaction and covenantal
sponsorship have been an occasion of much good even to the reprobate—e.g. via the gospel much
good has even come to unbelievers because of the ‘restraints’ thereby imposed
on idolatry and ‘hellish impiety.’”
This is actually true. One of the “by-products” of
“saving grace” operating amongst the elect is that a restraining influence
often reverberates right through to the ungodly. Under such circumstances, sin,
instead of parading itself brazenly, only “slinks” along. But to call this
effect “grace” is to make a logical jump the nature of the premises will not
afford. “Suppression of natural propensities” would be a better description.
Even the mafia “watch their step” when the police are around. In a social
climate deeply affected by the Christian ethos, many of the godless ape the
Christian ethic in many ways out of various and complex motives, mainly because
of perceived self-advantage in so doing. (H.
L. Williams, “British Reformed Journal” [“The Free Offer Issue,” Part 7)
No comments:
Post a Comment