-
Chapter 3: Proof Of The Second Of The Three Points In This Debate; Or, The Proof Of This Proposition, That To Propound The Grace-Offer In The External Means, Is No Means Of The Spirit’s Working An Internal Ability In Sinners To Close Savingly With The Offer; Neither Doth Or Will He Set In With Offers To Any Such End.
This proposition is a direct reverse, or quite contrary theme to the triumphs of the plea about offers; yea; it’s contrary to the very mending clause of their article suggested so plausibly before in favour of offers. The emendation of defects discovered in their article is this, that while the offer of Christ, say they, is propounding in the external means to sinners, the Spirit of Christ may be working an internal ability in these sinners to close in savingly with the offer. {“And it shall come to pass, when many evils and troubles are befallen them, that this song shall testify against them as a witness; for it shall not be forgotten out of the mouths of their seed; for I know their imagination…
Further Study
Chapter 8: A Continuation To Resolve The Posing Question, How Must We Preach The Gospel To Sinners, If We Do Not Offer The Gospel To Them?
Chapter 9: Some Texts Of Scripture That Are Evidently Mis-applied To Uphold Offer Preaching, Set Right To Confute The Offer-Way
Third Preface (1973)
-
Chapter 2: A Disproof Of Offers, Or, The Proof Of The First Of The Three Crowning Points In This Debate; Viz., That Offers Of The Gospel, And Offers Of Salvation To Sinners, Are No Preaching Of The Gospel, Nor Preaching Salvation Unto Sinners.
Do you look, Sirs, upon your Free offers of Grace, &c., {as you call them} to be preaching the Gospel? Yes surely, you will say, we look upon these, especially if we look only one way, to be both one and the same. That is, we look upon them, that albeit all preaching of Christ to sinners is not an offer of Christ to them, yet every free offer of Christ to sinners is preaching the Salvation of Christ to them. Nevertheless I tell you the truth, that offers of Salvation are a thing that falls far short of preaching the Gospel; and a thing that falls far shorter than preaching the Salvation of the Gospel unto sinners. For observe, the power of the Gospel…
-
The Difference Between John Gill’s Free Declaration of the Gospel to Sinners and the Banner of Truth’s ‘Free Offer’
Dear Brother: What is the difference between Gill’s ‘free declaration of peace and pardon, righteousness, life and salvation to poor sinners’ and the ‘free offer’ and ‘duty faith’ of those who deny outright that Gill appealed to all men everywhere to repent and believe the gospel? The difference is that Gill keeps to the gospel as fulfilling what the law could not do, namely provide ‘free grace’. Modern harsh critics of Gill such as friends of the Banner of Truth and Reformation Today, cannot give up their trust in the law for salvation and sanctification. They start with preaching the gospel of duties until faith comes (sic!) and end with preaching sanctification and holiness through keeping the law. There is no room for free grace…
-
Chapter 1: The Method Propounded, The Matter Stated, And Followed Into The Grand Plea For Offers, And These Briefly Examined And Defeated.
The order of this little writing will consist principally of three points. 1. Concerning offers of Grace. 2. Concerning invitation of sinners to come to Christ. 3. Concerning exhortations to sinners to come to Christ. And albeit I may insist mostly {if the Lord will} upon the first branch of these three laid down, thereby, through the Lord’s assistance, to rectify the mistaken doctrine about offers of Grace, and to advance the true doctrine of Free Grace Operations working efficaciously upon the elect of God; yet I may likewise add something, though very briefly, which belongs to the other two branches. To begin by laying down the method of handling the first, viz., the offers of Grace and Salvation. I. To show how men do…
Further Study
Chapter 10: A Reply Made Unto Sundry Pleas Urged Against What Is Written
Second Preface (Date Unkown)
Chapter 3: Proof Of The Second Of The Three Points In This Debate; Or, The Proof Of This Proposition, That To Propound The Grace-Offer In The External Means, Is No Means Of The Spirit’s Working An Internal Ability In Sinners To Close Savingly With The Offer; Neither Doth Or Will He Set In With Offers To Any Such End.
-
Evangelizing Or Proselyting?
Arminians evangelize, right? Low-Calvinists evangelize, right? Moderate-Calvinists evangelize, right? Hyper-Calvinists don't evangelize, right? Wrong! The Hyper-Calvinists are the only persons who evangelize. The other groups proselyte. In a recent study on Hyper-Calvinism[1], I distinguished between evangelizing and proselyting. In his book, "Hyper-Calvinism": Is It True?", Stanley Philipps differentiates between the two systems. On page 63, he writes: "(Proselytizing and evangelizing are not the same thing! Modern "evangelism" is a misnomer - it is blatant "proselytizing.”) The Hyper-calvinists never utilized man-made institutions to improve on God's Word. They never turned to the world of the ungodly for financial support or for church members. Finding no "free offer" - not even once - in the Scripture, they give none. To them, the true Gospel is a proclamation,…
-
Divine Sovereignty And Human Responsibility
Jared Smith's response to Roy Hargrave's arguments against Hyper Calvinism. Part one of two studies. The second study is called, "Is Hyper Calvinism A False Gospel?" The Arminians believe it is the SPIRITUAL duty of the unregenerate to savingly believe on Christ, as they have the inherent ABILITY to exercise saving faith which results in the new birth. The Low and Moderate Calvinists do not believe it is the spiritual duty of unregenerate sinners to savingly believe on Christ, as they are dead in trespasses and sins and therefore do not have the inherent ability to savingly believe on Christ. However, they do believe it remains the MORAL duty of the unregenerate to savingly believe on Christ, because one's inability to exercise saving faith does…
