Thursday, December 6, 2012

Musings on Election and Universal Justification


Consider this excerpt from Nicolaus Hunnius' Epitome Credendorum:

321. e. God has, therefore, in the act of election, considered no other circumstance, but that of the Lord Jesus having been received along with his merits, and righteousness, into the hearts of some men. And these men having been entirely reconciled to Him, God has elected them unto eternal life. —Whilst on the other hand He considered that, with some men no faith would be found, who must accordingly be said to have rejected the Lord Jesus in unbelief, — that they would not partake of his righteousness and his merits, and therefore still remain in their sins and under the burden of the divine wrath, — for all these reasons they have been found without Christ, and have therefore not been elected to eternal life. 
322. This it is that constitutes the difference between those, whom God has elected, and those whom He has rejected, viz : that some have been found in Christ, which has not been the case with the rest; just as the same qualities serve to constitute the distinction between those, who have been saved, and those who have been damned. „He that believeth on him (the Son) is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, — he that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him," John. 8, 18, 36. 
323. f. Thus God, in that He has elected the believing of mankind, and rejected the unbelieving from among them — has been considering especially man's faith. — This is not to be understood as if this faith could, by itself, give unto any man such a worth and value, by the considering of which God might be induced to the work of mercy, and thereupon to elect this individual: no, faith is only to be considered as a means, by the exercise of which the Lord Jesus Christ is united with man, and in consequence of which union, Christ's innocence, righteousness and merits (which we have shown to be the only qualities, which are considered in the act of election) are applied and appropriated unto man. Which means nothing else, than that we are justified before, and saved by God, not for the sake of man's faith and his good qualities alone , but for the sake of that faith, which has laid hold of the merits and the righteousness of the Lord Jesus, and by which man desires to be justified and saved. (Hunnius, Nicolaus. "Ch. XIV: On the Election of Grace." Epitome Credendorum: Containing a Concise and Popular View of the Doctrines of the Lutheran Church. Trans. Paul Edward Gottheil. Nuremberg: U.E. Sebald, 1847. 90-91. Print.)

What N. Hunnius is saying here is that we are elected in view of our faith. Yes, in view of our Spirit-worked faith (which lays hold of the merits of Christ).

What does this mean in terms of universal justification? Well, I propose that one falls into error when saying that the whole world is justified regardless of faith; that is, that those are justified who never have nor will have faith.  If the whole world is justified regardless of faith, then it should hold true that the whole world is part of the elect. But we wouldn't say that the whole world is numbered among the elect, right? If we mess up justification then we surely mess up election. My favorite Scripture when it comes to election and justification is Romans 8:30. It is so succinct, clear, and dogmatic: 

And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

If God has justified all men, then all men have been called and given faith (which alone justifies; Ap IV: 67 and 78) in the Gospel; if they have been justified then they have been predestined to eternal life. Now, have all men been predestined to eternal life? Have all men even heard the Gospel (been called)? Surely no Lutheran would say such absurdities. Likewise, I contend that it's erroneous to say that all men have been justified by God. If one does make such a claim, then he also has to say that all have been elected to eternal life by God. And nothing can change our election, God's will, right? If all are justified, then all are predestined, and finally all are heaven bound -- that's the logical conclusion. This is what happens when we go overboard trying to combat limited atonement.

32 comments:

  1. Christian...you need to go back and read the Hunnius excerpt because he beautifully expounds universal justification. God has done His part to save men, but men can still lose their salvation on account of themselves. You need to see this...otherwise God becomes nothing more than a team captain choosing who will be on His team for a weekend pick up game based on how good they are and the rest damned by Him because of their own accounting.

    To say man is elected on account of his faith, that there is anything that is good in him is the error of Lenski. This is gross error! No, as Hunnius says correctly, God has predestined those that he foreknew and that they are the 'elect' and therefore predenstined... They receive the righteousness of Christ by faith...it is only a conduit..."This is not to be understood as if this faith could, by itself, give unto any man such a worth and value, by the considering of which God might be induced to the work of mercy, and thereupon to elect this individual: no, faith is only to be considered as a means, by the exercise of which the Lord Jesus Christ is united with man, and in consequence of which union, Christ's innocence, righteousness and merits (which we have shown to be the only qualities, which are considered in the act of election) are applied and appropriated unto man. "

    Christian - God does call all men unto salvation. Many are called, but few are the chosen. The chosen are those he foreknew that would have faith.

    "What N. Hunnius is saying here is that we are elected in view of our faith. Yes, in view of our Spirit-worked faith (which lays hold of the merits of Christ)." No...we are 'the elect' in view of God's foreknowledge...to say otherwise is what is known as particular grace. Lutherans believe in universal grace.

    ReplyDelete
  2. All are justified in that their sins have been accounted for. This does not mean that the individual is justified in the same sense as if he had faith. God hates sin but loves the sinner since He died for all sinners and atoned for their sins. But the one who rejects this atonement; this objective justification will die in those sins because of their rejection.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So essentially, Joe, if one loses their faith, then they were never really elect in the first place? Sounds like Calvinism to me.

    No, we are elected intuitu fidei. It's just that the fidei is NOT something good in us, but the holy and perfect gift of God the Holy Spirit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "All are justified in that their sins have been accounted for."

    We in the Lutheran Church call that "Atonement."

    "This does not mean that the individual is justified in the same sense as if he had faith. God hates sin but loves the sinner since He died for all sinners and atoned for their sins. But the one who rejects this atonement; this objective justification will die in those sins because of their rejection."

    Quite so. Hence they were never justified, declared righteous, or forgiven, though Christ surely died for their sins. Sadly, God's wrath remained upon them and never left due to their unbelief.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "So essentially, Joe, if one loses their faith, then they were never really elect in the first place? Sounds like Calvinism to me."

    Now you're starting to sound like Huber.

    "No, we are elected intuitu fidei. It's just that the fidei is NOT something good in us, but the holy and perfect gift of God the Holy Spirit."

    You are wrong to put words in Hunnius mouth when he says the opposite in the text that I quoted previously. We are not the elect on account of faith, but upon foreknowledge.

    ReplyDelete
  6. To say man is elected on account of his faith...This is gross error!"

    "The chosen are those he foreknew that would have faith."

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it seems like those two sentences contradict. Or maybe it's because I minced them? I don't know.

    I think in the quote that you provided from N. Hunnius, he is talking about faith being a good work, us providing it. Or a stale, bare faith. He then goes on to say that it's not because of us that we have faith but that God has shoved it down our throat as a gift which receives and believes in Christ. He uses the words: "a means...of which the Lord Jesus Christ is united with man" and "but [God regards us as elect] for the sake of that faith, which has laid hold of the merits and the righteousness of the Lord Jesus"

    And so, earlier in the quote from the OP he states: "God has, therefore, in the act of election, considered no other circumstance, but that of the Lord Jesus having been received along with his merits, and righteousness, into the hearts of some men...This it is that constitutes the difference between those, whom God has elected, and those whom He has rejected, viz : that some have been found in Christ..." How are we found in Christ united to him? By faith.

    So in his foreknowledge he saw those who would have faith in his Son and so elected them to eternal life. So clearly, in view of our faith in Christ -- which alone unites us with Christ -- he elected us to eternal life.

    "All are justified in that their sins have been accounted for. This does not mean that the individual is justified in the same sense as if he had faith."

    The only way, as the Apology (cited above) states, that a sinner is justified before God is by faith which receives Christ's righteousness which then acts as a shield against God's wrath which was "already" on them. So the only sense, I contend, that a sinner is justified is as if he has faith. Likewise, the only way someone is elect is by God-given faith in Christ's merits. To say all are justified before God is to say something that is not true because not all have faith in His Son. But running with the idea that the whole world is justified, it goes to stand that the whole world would have to be elect as well. I mean, the Holy Spirit says that those he justified (the world according to UOJ) he glorified. Universal election is the coherent consequence of universal justification.

    If you say, "well they actually aren't justified because they rejected it" then it still doesn't add up. I don't work from the premise that there are two justifications of the sinner before God: one fake and one real. One before faith and one by faith. Because if the sinner was "righteous" (and therefore elect) before receiving faith (Christ's righteousness) -- while he was still an unbeliever -- then how can someone be said to have lost that righteousness? If God regarded him as "righteous in His sight" before he ever believed then why would the sinner rejecting the Son (because of unbelief, no less) all of a sudden invalidate God's status of him as "righteous". He was an unbeliever before and after his rejection so why would an active rejection all of a sudden change how God views him? There is no other sense in which God thinks that a blasphemer of him is righteous and holy except by faith which truly justifies before God. Likewise, there is no other way God elects except that before the foundations of the world he saw his Son's atonement and those who were united by faith to him in earthly time.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You've written a faithful statement Christian. Hunnius made the same on Page 57 of his Theses Opposed to Huberianism:

    Thesis 7
    Outside of faith in Christ and without it, man remains in condemnation, according to John 3, "Whoever does not believe has been judged already.” And again, “Whoever does not believe in the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him.” And Mark 16, “Whoever does not believe will be condemned.” If such a one has already been judged, if the wrath of God remains upon him, if he will be condemned, then in what beautiful way has he been justified? In what splendid manner have his sins been remit­ ted unto him? Indeed, where sins have truly been remitted, there all wrath and condemnation are gone (Rom. 8). "Blessed are they whose sins have been remitted" (Psalm 32). Now then, are all men blessed? Even unbelievers? Turks? Reprobate Jews?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Christian, you taking what the atonement accomplished for all men objectively and applying it individually to all men. You do not understand what atonement means; a pardon; forgiveness of the debt; redemption. These things are universal to man and faith is the means to receive them individually. Just as the doctrine of the Trinity uses the word 'Trinity' to describe God, so we use 'justification' in an objective judicial word to describe the atonement. Neither are found in scripture or the BoC but they accurately describe what is in Scripture.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hunnius, a true Confessional Christian responded years ago to the teaching that all men were objectively justified before and without faith:

    Mark 16, “Whoever does not believe will be condemned.” If such a one has already been judged, if the wrath of God remains upon him, if he will be condemned, then in what beautiful way has he been justified? In what splendid manner have his sins been remit­ted unto him?"

    Scripture and the BOC define the atonement as payment for sins. UOJ makes Christ the Mediator for the unbelieving world without faith. Scripture teaches and the BOC faithfully confirms that Christ is Mediator only through the righteousness of faith worked by the Holy Spirit through the Means of Grace alone.

    80] AAC That We Obtain The Remission of Sins By Faith Alone In Christ, "The wrath of God cannot be appeased if we set against it our own works, because Christ has been set forth as a Propitiator, so that, for His sake, the Father may become reconciled to us. But Christ is not apprehended as a Mediator except by faith. Therefore, by faith alone we obtain remission of sins when we comfort our hearts with confidence in the mercy promised for Christ's sake."
    http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php

    Since UOJ fails in this primary tenet, the whole doctrine falls.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Christ is Mediator regardless of faith...btw, Brett, the quote is from Nicolaus the son of whom you speak...not sure if you caught that. Oh, one more thing...you never answered on LQ before you were off to slay deer whether or not the redemption and reconciliation of the human race was universal.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Joe states, "Christ is Mediator regardless of faith..."

    The Lutheran Confessions state:
    "But Christ is not apprehended as a Mediator except by faith."
    http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php

    46] Thus, because faith, which freely receives the remission of sins, sets Christ, the Mediator and Propitiator, against God's wrath, it does not present our merits or our love [which would be tossed aside like a little feather by a hurricane]. This faith is the true knowledge of Christ, and avails itself of the benefits of Christ, and regenerates hearts, and precedes the fulfilling of the Law.”
    http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php

    Also, 71] "but we maintain this, that properly and truly, by faith itself, we are for Christ's sake accounted righteous, or are acceptable to God. And because "to be justified" means that out of unjust men just men are made, or born again, it means also that they are pronounced or accounted just. For Scripture speaks in both ways. [The term "to be justified" is used in two ways: to denote, being converted or regenerated; again, being accounted righteous. Accordingly we wish first to show this, that faith alone makes of an unjust, a just man, i.e., receives remission of sins".
    http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php

    Joe, UOJ teaches contrary to Scripture and the Luthrean Confessions as is clearly shown here.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Right on cue, Brett. You refuse to look at universal redemption and reconciliation objectively. Next I'm sure you will try to convince us that the boogie man goes away when we close our eyes.

    http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/12/from-layman-who-only-reads-luther-and.html

    Your sect leader is starting to show his colors. According to the graphic not only do Lenski and Jackson reject the reconciliation of the world by the atonement, but they do not understand what OJ is. You really should take the advice and practice safe sects.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "But Christ is not apprehended as a Mediator except by faith."
    http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php

    Regardless of your opinion of me, the BOC's statement against UOJ still stands. God the Father is not propitious to unbelievers either objectively or subjectively outside of faith in Christ alone, worked solely through the Means of Grace alone.

    This is tantamount to reaching through a cadavers rib cage and tearing it's heart out. UOJ is a dead gospel that teaches contrary to Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions.

    In fact Scripture teaches, the BOC and Hunnius confirm, not only is God the Father not propitious towards unbelievers but His wrath and condemnation abide (remains) upon them.
    John 3:36, "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."
    John 3:18, "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

    "wrath of God Abideth"
    "is condemned already"

    ReplyDelete
  14. Joe,

    I dare say it is you who does not understand both - atonement and justification. I say this because you mix the two. I dare say also it is you who does not understand the way the word reconciliation is used - it is not a completed act of God. That is the problem with your question and your assumption you believe reconciliation is over.

    Reconciliation it is still an on going act of God, it began in the Atonement but people who trust in Christ's atonement are said to be the only ones reconciled to God.

    People who reject Christ are not reconciled, for why would they miss heaven if they were already reconciled by virtue of the universal atonement? Therefore reconciliation and faith go hand in hand.

    This is the teaching of 2 Cor 5:17-21.

    LPC

    ReplyDelete
  15. further...

    Joe in reply to Daniel's
    "So essentially, Joe, if one loses their faith, then they were never really elect in the first place? Sounds like Calvinism to me."

    You said

    Now you're starting to sound like Huber.

    I think you miss the point, you are then left to explain if at all you believe like Luther that believer can lose faith.

    Sorry to say, you are being funny. Why would Daniel sound like Huber when in fact he is the one accusing you of Calvinism? For in truth Huber was never rid of his Calvinism though he accused Leyser and Hunnius etc of it. This is the same with C F W Walther, in fact his doctrine of election is Calvinistic. He ignored the commentaries of the BoC authors and editors on election.

    The only way Daniel can be like Huber is to believe like you do - to believe in universal justification which I doubt Daniel affirms that, based on what I read here.


    LPC

    ReplyDelete
  16. 1 Timothy 2
    King James Version (KJV)

    1 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

    2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

    3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

    4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

    5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

    6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

    ReplyDelete
  17. God has done His part and redemption is for all men...this is objective; without regard to the individual. All are men's sins are forgiven in Christ if they would only not reject Him as the hen would gather her chicks...but hey wouldn't be gathered...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anyone who is confessing as these young gents are here are not Lutheran, since they are denying the redemption of the human race which is the pardon...the acquittal of the sins of all men in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If a man is not rejecting this he is saved.

    ReplyDelete
  19. According to Joe Krohn I'm going to hell. I'd encourage anyone viewing to read, well, the Scriptures of course (especially Romans) and Apology IV and FC III of the Confessions. Don't forget Hunnius' Theses Opposed to Huberianism either. Then you, dear reader, make the decision: Am I going to hell because I reject that God regards sinners as justified, righteous, and holy before the Holy Spirit illuminates them though faith in the Word and Sacraments? Joe Krohn wants to pretend that God thinks of sinners as righteous and holy when they don't have faith in Christ but rather blaspheme Him.

    From Hunnius' theses (* denotes italics in the original document):

    "Thesis 19
    In addition, if we were all justified at the same time with a general justification and restored to the bosom of divine grace with sins having been forgiven solely by the merit of Christ without faith, then does not the justification by faith so accurately passed on by St. Paul lie in ruins, since it is clearly not a necessity for us [to be regarded as righteous before God]?

    Thesis 20
    Huber [Krohn] will *never* be able to explain his way out of this nonsense of insoluble contradictions and most prodigious absurdities. Therefore let him enjoy his justification, and let him bless his *elect and sanctified people* with it -- Turks, Jews, and all unbelievers. We, in the meantime, shall restrict justification to believers only, as prescribed by all prophetic and apostolic Scriptures."

    ReplyDelete
  20. If the world has been acquitted, then why does it stand condemned? For rejecting the aquittal that it never believed in the first place? And if the acquittal requires belief to be valid, then in what sense was it ever valid to begin with?

    No, these heretical, Huberian mental gymnastics will not fly on this blog, much less in the actual Ecclesia Augustana, and certainly not in the Ecclesia Catholica. Repent of your heresy, Joe, and stop leading other people down your Satanic path. Until such time, kindly stop posting on this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  21. It's refreshing to see someone who believes and confesses Universal Objective Justification speak with detail about their doctrine. It has always been a challenge to get them to explain in detail what their central doctrine teaches. Since Scripture, the Christian Book of Concord are void of them and the (W)ELS Catechism was void of it until Kuske placed himself on the wrong side of Revelations and added it in 1982.
    http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2011/04/99-cent-kuske-catechism-overpriced.html

    Note the true teaching behind Universal Objective Justification in Joe's statement: Anyone who is confessing as these young gents are here are not Lutheran, since they are denying the redemption of the human race which is the pardon...the acquittal of the sins of all men in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If a man is not rejecting this he is saved.

    UOJ teaches that the whole world of unbelievers are already saved as long as they don't reject that they've already been forgiven. By this he reaffirms the object in the false gospel of UOJ, which must be believed, is not Christ but the forgiveness of sins. This is the chief and central article of the LCMS, ELS, WELS and Seventh Day Adventist's.

    ReplyDelete
  22. You misunderstood, Christian...I wasn't referring to you but to the man who denies his acquittal by continuing to revel in his sin. I did not judge you. What I said was anyone who denies that the atonement has redeemed the human race as scripture and the confessions claim, they are not Lutheran. It appears that four commentators on this blog fall into that category since none of you will capitulate to this truth. Your reasoning will only lead you to particular grace as I have shown and ultimately limited atonement...which is about as 'Lutheran' as Lenski was. We are saved by grace...faith is the means by which we receive this grace as N. Hunnius quote states that y'all posted. By grace for the sake of Christ THROUGH faith...I will honor your request and post no more.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Joe,

    who denies that the atonement has redeemed the human race as scripture and the confessions claim

    But this is not what you ONLY mean, you mean that atonement has ALREADY justified the whole world even though they still not in Christ. Scripture teaches that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for the ungodly. It does not say while we were yet sinners, God has already justified us, declared us as righteous irrespective to faith in Christ.

    Your sophistry is the reason why none here can simply agree and answer your questions because you equate the atonement with justification just like Calvinists do.

    Engelder speaking of Lenski said He[Lenski] protests against making objective reconciliation, general justification, mean that God on Easter morning did actually pronounce the world, all individual making up the world, really innocent of all sin and guilt

    Since you criticise Lenski then you believe the opposite of what Lenksi protests about, you do believe that all the world are already innocent of sin and guilt irrespective of faith in Christ. Everyone is a guilt free saint then. What is this but a form of Christian Universalism? This makes repentance and faith a form of assent. What is the need to repent if you are already forgiven even before you repent? Your position makes repentance and faith a form of assent, which St. James says the same faith of devils.

    Lenski was correct in objecting about reconciliation, because scholars have documented that reconciliation is a broader term and embraces more concepts that can be abused and in which case you like other UOJers do.

    Lenski was a better exegete than any of your UOJ heroes. He enjoys even now long dead, the respect of non-Lutheran Protestants even though they disagreed with him. Which one of your UOJ heroes enjoy that except for those who are in the same UOJ cult?

    From Walther who did not earn a solid doctorate degree to Pieper who practiced eisegesis of Romans 4:25. none of your UOJ heroes have competently handled the key UOJ verse - Romans 4:25.

    You follow the arrogance of your UOJ teachers in maligning Lenski of whose works I doubt you have read yourself.

    LPC

    ReplyDelete
  24. No, Lito...I can differentiate between what is objective and what is subjective...you on the other hand rely on too much reason. You give me a headache...

    ReplyDelete
  25. Quoting Hunnius from Pastor Paul Rydecki's faithful translation of his Theses Oppossed to Huberianism:

    Thesis 23
    But neither is this point being disputed, whether those who are condemned by their own fault could have (without any secret decree for their salvation standing in the way) come to faith and be saved through the ordinary means, by the power of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, since no one is saved without God's election, they were not going to be among the elect, were they? For we place both things together. And since first that which concerns salva­ tion is agreed upon in our churches, that, as Christ maintains, even Tyre and Sidon at one time could have been brought to repentance (and, consequently, to salvation), then also that which later has to do with election should properly be placed outside the realm of doubt, except for the one who most absurdly raves that some peo­ple could have belonged to the number of the saved who neverthe­less could not have belonged to the number of the predestined.


    I want to highlight one section in particular because it speaks to Joe Krohn's clear articulation of the false gospel of Universal Objective Justification's teaching that all men are already saved if they don't reject that they were all forgiven at Christ's atonement.

    Joe states above, "Anyone who is confessing as these young gents are here are not Lutheran, since they are denying the redemption of the human race which is the pardon...the acquittal of the sins of all men in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If a man is not rejecting this he is saved."

    Hunnius states, "...except for the one who most absurdly raves that some peo­ple could have belonged to the number of the saved who neverthe­less could not have belonged to the number of the predestined."

    Hunnius was a bold defender and teacher of Scripture and the faithful Book of Concord. The more that is written in defense of UOJ the clearer it is that UOJ is Huberianism.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "If a man is not rejecting this he is saved."

    Please explain, Brett how if a man is not rejecting his salvation, he isn't saved?

    ReplyDelete
  27. You give me a headache...

    This is the fruit of UOJ. Because UOJ is founded on misinterpretation of Scripture and fallacies, they spit the dummy when a simple articulation of JBFA is explained to them.

    1 Cor 14:33

    UOJ has a way of re-wiring the brain so that the synapses fail to ignite.
    I have observed this often amongst UOJers.

    LPC

    ReplyDelete
  28. The point, Joe, is that the whole world is not saved. In fact, the majority are unbelievers who never believed in Christ and will never believe in Christ do not stand in God's grace because they have not obtained Christ as Mediator but remain under God's wrath and condemnation.

    Matt. 7:13, "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:"

    Galatians 5:4, "Christ is become no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."

    Your premise is in error - therefore all that follows is in error too. The Scritpural and Confessional contradictions you continually have to navigate in your confession of the doctrine of Objective Justification are a symptom of the nature of the doctrine.

    God given repentance and faith in Christ alone will lead you into all truth, God's Word is truth.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "The point, Joe, is that the whole world is not saved."

    I didn't say that it was. I never have. Regardless, the grace of God extends to all men and Christ is still Mediator despite unbelief that He is such. And because of His merits, it is unnecessary for anyone to perish. However, they do because they reject the Mediator.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Joe Krohn December 14, 2012 8:30 AM
    "If a man is not rejecting this he is saved."

    Please explain, Brett how if a man is not rejecting his salvation, he isn't saved?



    Joe, are children who die before they are baptized saved eternally?

    ReplyDelete
  31. If you understood Election and ultimately Justification and Sanctification, you wouldn't need to ask it.

    To say unequivocally yes or no is out of our realm of understanding. However, based on 1 Cor. 7:14, a believer's children are sanctified.

    ReplyDelete