dlowrie290
Puritan Board Freshman
Hi all,
I am in a written conversation with an Arminian and the topic of the legitimacy of the Gospel call to the non-elect came up. Here is the excerpt from my synergistic friend...
Now, I have been going over Mark 10:17-31 (gotta throw in that context ) for about 2 weeks. Reading commentaries, looking at the Greek text and just plain reading the text of scripture for the plain truths that it is expounding. I feel I have a pretty good handle on what's being said and why it's being said. Jesus is exposing the fact that this rich young ruler (RYR) is an idolater, is self-righteous, and doesn't recognize his own inability and inherent sinfulness; and even when Christ reveals that to him, he isn't willing to let it go and he walks away saddened. Jesus then talks about the impossibility of salvation for those with wealth, but what is impossible with men is possible with God.
But the question of my friend still stands. Is the offer of salvation to the RYR a valid offer granting that the RYR wasn't among the elect? Or should we just ask if the offer of salvation is legitimate only for the elect? I get that it is effectual to only the elect. Is the Gospel call an offer at all, or is it a command, or both? Does the Gospel have more application than that of bringing the elect to spiritual life and all that entails; does it also bring condemnation to those that reject it? If so, can I get that scripture reference or am I just way off track?
Feel free to throw me any additional points that might help in my response to my Arminian friend.
Thanks to all and God bless
I am in a written conversation with an Arminian and the topic of the legitimacy of the Gospel call to the non-elect came up. Here is the excerpt from my synergistic friend...
Regarding the scriptures you quoted, one was Jonah 2:9. There is no doubt that salvation is of the Lord. I agree with you on that. However, this does not mean that man does not have the free choice to receive salvation. Of course salvation is of the Lord, but too many times in scripture we see God calling people to repent, and they refused out of their own will. If you look at Mark 10:21,22, we see the story of the rich young ruler. The rich young ruler was called by Jesus to follow Him. Yet, out of the rich young ruler’s free will he walked away without eternal life. If you believe that God chose only some individuals to be saved, how do you interpret the passage in Mark 10:21,22? Why would Jesus call him to follow, if this man was not chosen for salvation? It would seem useless and strange for Jesus to be calling this man to follow Him.
Now, I have been going over Mark 10:17-31 (gotta throw in that context ) for about 2 weeks. Reading commentaries, looking at the Greek text and just plain reading the text of scripture for the plain truths that it is expounding. I feel I have a pretty good handle on what's being said and why it's being said. Jesus is exposing the fact that this rich young ruler (RYR) is an idolater, is self-righteous, and doesn't recognize his own inability and inherent sinfulness; and even when Christ reveals that to him, he isn't willing to let it go and he walks away saddened. Jesus then talks about the impossibility of salvation for those with wealth, but what is impossible with men is possible with God.
But the question of my friend still stands. Is the offer of salvation to the RYR a valid offer granting that the RYR wasn't among the elect? Or should we just ask if the offer of salvation is legitimate only for the elect? I get that it is effectual to only the elect. Is the Gospel call an offer at all, or is it a command, or both? Does the Gospel have more application than that of bringing the elect to spiritual life and all that entails; does it also bring condemnation to those that reject it? If so, can I get that scripture reference or am I just way off track?
Feel free to throw me any additional points that might help in my response to my Arminian friend.
Thanks to all and God bless