10 February, 2017




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 reprobatee.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