(I)
Martyn McGeown
We should take note that
the word offer has undergone a development in meaning over the
centuries. In the days of the Synod of Dordt, the word offer commonly
meant to present, to display, or to set forth. The modern use of the word offer
includes the idea of a desire or intention in the one making the offer, as well
as a presupposed ability in the one to whom the offer is made. These ideas are
foreign to Dordt’s meaning of the term.
------------------------------------------------
(II)
(II)
C. J. Connors
The term “offer” [used in the 16/17th century]
does not imply a “desire” in God to save as [proponents of the well-meant offer]
would have us understand … The confessional term “offer” does not carry
[enough] weight to [bear such usage] ... It does not imply a conditional will
or a delight of God toward the salvation of all, nor does it imply any ability
in the sinner to receive it—both of which are at the very least implied in
[the well-meant offer’s use of the word].
“Offer” in the Reformed confessions is the Latin
term offero—meaning “to present,
exhibit, or set forth.” It is in this sense that the term “offer” is used by
the Westminster Confession of Faith
and associated documents. “The Sum of Saving Knowledge” (found in the back of
most editions of the Westminster Standards)
in accord with the Latin offero and biblical teaching, defines
“offer” in relation to the means of grace as “to clearly hold forth Christ
already crucified before our eyes.” Or again, as Larger Catechism Q&A 72 says: “(Faith) rests upon Christ and
His righteousness, therein held forth.” The apostle Paul sets the
biblical pattern. The gospel must be preached so that men are obliged to: “Obey
the truth, (as those) before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set
forth, crucified among you?” (Gal. 3:1).
The Greek word prographoo is used
[in Gal. 3:1] and means firstly, “to write beforehand,” as in respect to time;
then “to depict or portray openly,” as in respect to
place and sight. Thayer understands Galatians 3:1 to mean: “taught most
definitely and plainly concerning the meritorious efficacy of the death of
Christ.” The term is figurative and means “to write before the eyes
of all who believe.” This passage gives the biblical meaning of the term
“offer” as used in the Reformed confessions.
Offer means that “the Gospel is externally
proposed ...”[1]
[It means to] hold forth before
the mind.
As to its content, the confessional offer includes
both the clear setting forth of Christ crucified and God’s way
of salvation in Him. The confessional offer presupposes the setting
forth of God’s exalted holiness and the law to convince and convict
men of sin and to show them their urgent need of Christ. It sets forth and displays Christ
crucified as the blessed and only Saviour in all His glory, beauty, suitability
and sufficiency for the chief of sinners. It authoritatively declares the
command and call of God to all men, without exception, to repent and believe as
the only way to life. It beseeches and with the cords of love and grace,
tenderly draws the labouring, heavy-laden sinner to Christ and salvation in
Him. It promises the Spirit to the elect to make them able and
willing to come, and it proclaims the particular promise of
God, that all who come will surely find mercy. In short, it must herald the
good news of the gospel to sinners—nothing less, and nothing more.
The presentation of the gospel—the [confessional]
“offer”—in its totality does not constitute, or even imply, a well-meant offer
to all. The presentation of the gospel implies no active delight, desire or
longing within God toward the salvation of all in the preaching. All that can
be rightfully implied from the gospel [confessional] offer is that God is
pleased to save repentant, believing sinners—nothing more. The well-meant offer,
however, cannot stand without first presupposing a conditional will of God to
the salvation of the reprobate, Christ dead for all, and general grace. These
are, of course the most basic premises of Arminianism. They, and
the “offer” they create, must be rejected.
=======
Footnotes:
[1.] Herman
Witsius, The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man (Escondido:
The Den Dulk Christian Foundation, 1990), vol. 1, p. 354.
------------------------------------------------
(III)
(III)
David J.
Engelsma
[Source:
David J. Engelsma, Hyper-Calvinism
and the Call of the Gospel: An Examination of the Well-Meant Offer (Jenison,
MI: RFPA, 2014), p. 48; cf. n. 46]
In the past the word offer from
the Latin offero was used by Reformed men to describe God’s
activity in the preaching of the gospel because the word originally had the
meaning “bring to [someone],” “present [something or
someone to somebody].” All Reformed men hold that Christ is presented in the
preaching to everyone who hears the preaching. In this sense He is “offered” in
the gospel. Calvin used offer in this sense, as do the Canons of Dordt: “It is not the fault of
the gospel, nor of Christ offered therein ... that those who
are called by the ministry of the Word refuse to come” (Canons, Heads 3–4, Article 9). But this is not the meaning of the
word when it is used in connection with a universal love of God and a desire of
God to save everybody.
... Although our quarrel with the offer is not a
quibbling over words, the word offer should be dropped from
the Reformed vocabulary. Not a biblical term, it is so loaded with Arminian
connotations today that it is no longer serviceable. Instead of an offer of
the gospel, we should speak of the call of the gospel as the
scriptures do.
------------------------------------------------
(IV)
(IV)
Russell J.
Dykstra
[Source:
John Calvin, Calvin’s
Calvinism: God’s Eternal Predestination and Secret Providence (Jenison,
MI: RFPA, 2009), p. 21, n. 10]
“Offered”: from offerre, which means
“to present, to exhibit or set forth.” This explanation of the word offer as
used by Calvin has been supplied by Henry Atherton, the secretary of Sovereign
Grace Union that reprinted Henry Cole’s translation of “Calvin’s Calvinism” in
1927.
------------------------------------------------
(V)
(V)
Ronald Hanko
[Source:
Ronald Hanko, Doctrine
According to Godliness: A Primer of Reformed Doctrine (Jenison,
MI: RFPA, 2012), p. 191]
There are many who prefer to speak of the gospel as
an “offer” rather than a call. It is interesting, to say the least, that
Scripture never uses the word offer to
describe the gospel. We have no objection to the word offer as
such. In its older sense it means only that in the gospel there is a “showing
forth” of Christ. The Westminster Larger Catechism, for example, defines an
offer of Christ as a “testifying that whosoever believers in Him
shall be saved” (WLC, Q&A 65).
In its modern sense, however, the word offer suggests
and is used to teach that God loves all men and wants to save every one of
them, that He makes an effort to save all of them in the gospel, and that
whether or not a sinner will be saved is dependent on the will of that sinner.
These teachings are all contrary to Scripture.
Scripture does not teach that God loves all men
(Ps. 11:5; John 13:1; Rom. 9:13), nor does it teach that God is trying to save
all of them (Isa. 6:9-11; Rom. 9:18; II Cor. 2:14-16). Certainly it does not
teach that in saving sinners God can be frustrated by their unwillingness, or
that He waits, cap in hand as it were, for them to accept His
salvation (Ps. 115:3; John 6:44; Rom. 9:16; Eph. 2:8-9). For these reasons we
prefer not to speak of the gospel as an “offer.”
------------------------------------------------
(VI)
(VI)
Herman Hoeksema
(1886-1965)
If the term “offer” is understood in the sense in
which it occurs in the confessions, and in which Calvin uses it (offere,
from obfero, meaning to present), there can be no
objection to that term, though, to prevent misunderstanding, it would be better
to employ the words to present, and presentation.
------------------------------------------------
(VII)
(VII)
Herman C. Hanko
[Source:
Common Grace Considered (2019
edition), pp. 21-22]
It might be worthwhile, in passing, to point out
that Calvin repeatedly used the word “offer” in his writings. And this use of
the word “offer” is one reason why Calvin is said to support the idea of the “gracious
and well-meant offer
of the gospel.” I once knew a man, now in glory, who so desperately hated the
word “offer” that, meaning well, he went through all of Calvin’s writings and
blotted out the word “offer” wherever he found it. This man made a serious
mistake and should never have done this. The word is, after all, found in the Canons of Dordt, a confession of the
Reformed Churches. It is a good word. But he misunderstood the Latin use of it.
The word “offer” comes from the Latin offere, which means, “to present, set
forth, and hold before someone.” And the idea of the
frequently used term “offer” is, therefore, to underscore the fact that in the
gospel, Christ is presented or set forth as
the One whom God has ordained to be the means of salvation; and that all who
hear the gospel are commanded to repent of their sin and believe in Christ. The
word is used by Calvin in the sense in which Paul uses it in Galatians 3:1: “O
foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth
before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth,
crucified among you?”
------------------------------------------------
(VIII)
(VIII)
Raymond A.
Blacketer
[Source:
Raymond A. Blacketer, “The Three Points in Most Parts Reformed: A
Re-examination of the So-Called Well-Meant Offer of Salvation”]
The important phrase in the original Latin
[of Canons III/IV.9] is Christo per evangelium oblato.
The word oblato is a participial form of the Latin word offero,
frequently translated with its English cognate, offer. But this is not the primary meaning of the Latin verb.
Rather, its most basic meanings include: to put in a person’s path, to cause to
be encountered; to show, reveal, exhibit; to present as something to be taken
note of, to bring or force to someone’s attention.[29] Thus, to interpret
this article as teaching that all persons who hear the gospel are confronted
with Christ, or that they encounter Christ in the gospel, is at least as
plausible as the assertion that such persons are offered Christ and salvation
through Christ in the preaching of the gospel [in the sense of God desiring to
save all who hear]. Set in the context of the broader teachings of the Canons and
the writings of major Reformed theologians from the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, the former interpretation appears to be much more plausible than the
latter.
=======
Footnotes:
[29.] See P. G. W.
Glare, ed., Oxford Latin Dictionary, corrected ed. (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1996), s.v. “offero.” It is not until the eighth through tenth
definitions that the sense of the modem English word offer comes through.
------------------------------------------------
(IX)
(IX)
A. W. Pink
Concerning the character and contents of the Gospel
the utmost confusion prevails today. The Gospel is not an “offer” to be bandied
around by evangelistic peddlers. The Gospel is no mere invitation, but a
proclamation, a proclamation concerning Christ; true, whether men believe it or
no. No man is asked to believe that Christ died for him in particular. The
Gospel, in brief, is this: Christ died for sinners, you are a sinner, believe
in Christ, and you shall be saved. In the Gospel, God simply announces the
terms upon which men may be saved (namely, repentance and faith) and,
indiscriminately, all are commanded to fulfill them.
------------------------------------------------
(X)
(X)
C. Matthew
McMahon
[Source:
C. Matthew McMahon, The Two Wills of God Made Easy: Does God Really
Have Two Wills? (Crossville, TN: Puritan Publications, 2016), pp. 216,
127]
[In the Westminster Confession, Chapter
6, Section 3,] we find the word “offer.” The Latin word they used here,
“offero,” means “to bring forward, place before, present, or expose.” It is a
publication of the Gospel, not giving or holding out the actual
effectual call of the Gospel.
Ames’ use of the word “offer” is the Latin “offerre,”
which means “to publish” or “shout aloud.” Here is a very important
distinction: the Puritans and reformers of old used the word “offer” in
a very different sense than modern evangelicals do today … The
Puritans and reformers used “offerre” in the sense that the Gospel was a
proclamation, or invitation to come and believe on Christ, the Savior”
------------------------------------------------
(XI)
(XI)
Steven Key
[Source:
“The Canons and Common Grace,” in Protestant Reformed
Theological Journal, vol. 37, number 2, p. 51]
The term “offer” has an entirely different
connotation today from its original Latin definition. In the Canons,
the term “offer” simply means “to present” or “to set forth.” The idea is that
of Acts 13:46, where Paul and Barnabas addressed the Jews, and said, “It was
necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to
you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of
everlasting life, lo, we tum to the Gentiles.” To take the simple concept,
well-understood by the fathers at Dordt, and to add the baggage associated with
the idea of the well-meant offer is unwarranted.
------------------------------------------------
(XII)
(XII)
Barry Gritters
The word translated “offer” in English is, not
surprisingly, offere, in
the Latin. But this word did not necessarily have the same connotations than as
it does in English today. The word offere primarily means “to
present, to bring towards, to thrust forward, to show, to exhibit.” Our
word offer has broader connotations and implies the ability to
accept or reject, as well as a desire on God’s part that the offer be accepted.
------------------------------------------------
(XIII)
(XIII)
More to come!
(DV)
Note:
Proof from the Canons of Dordt
that “Offer” has changed its meaning over time:
The Canons were among the many ecclesiastical documents written during the 16th and 17th centuries. In heads 3-4, article 14, it states thus:
“Faith is therefore to be considered as
the gift of God, not on account of its being offered by God to man, to be
accepted or rejected at his pleasure; but because it is in reality conferred,
breathed, and infused into him ...”
The Latin version states thus:
“Sic
ergo fides Dei donum est, non eo quod a Deo hominis arbitrio offeratur, sed
quod homini reipsa conferatur, inspiretur, et infundatur ...”
Now the modern-day definition of “offer” is "to present or proffer
(something) for (someone) to accept or reject as desired." (source:
google)
If we were to read that definition into the words “[faith’s] being
offered by God to man, to be accepted or rejected at his pleasure” we would
actually end up in a tautology (i.e. saying the same thing twice) ... for
example:
“Faith is therefore to be considered as the gift of God, not on account
of its being presented or proffered by God to man to be accepted or rejected as
desired, to be accepted or rejected at his pleasure; but because it is in
reality conferred, breathed, and infused into him ...”
If the writers of the Canons
defined “offer” in the same way as proponents of the WMO do, it would have been
needless to immediately add the words “to be accepted or rejected at his
pleasure” subsequent to it. For that phrase would be redundant. And the delegates
at Dordt were far too astute intellectually to commit such an error.
Therefore, “offer” cannot have had that meaning back in the 1600s. The
Latin dictionaries define “offer” (offeratur/offero) as primarily meaning “to
present, to exhibit, to set forth, to hold in front of someone.”
This argument also holds forth for every mention of the word “offer” in
Calvin’s writings.
No comments:
Post a Comment