-
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…
Further Study
Chapter 4: The Third Principal Point Is To Prove That An Offer Of Grace Is No Gift Of Grace; And Then Where Is Your Offer?
First Preface (1792)
Chapter 5: A Solution Of The Grand Question; How Must We Preach The Gospel, If We Do Not Offer The Gospel? Or, How Must We Preach Christ To Sinners, If We Do Not Offer Christ To Sinners?
-
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
Third Preface (1973)
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.
Chapter 12: Of Exhortation To Sinners To Come To Christ, In Preaching The Gospel, Examined.
-
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,…
-
Is Hyper-Calvinism A False Gospel?
Based on the false dichotomy between the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man, Low and Moderate Calvinists misrepresent High (Hyper) Calvinism as that form of doctrine which is unorthodox, killing a love for souls, eliminating the need for evangelism and undermining the purpose of prayer. Such are the charges set forth by Roy Hargrave as the reasons why he abhors the Hyper-Calvinists. However, are these assertions true? Is Hyper-Calvinism unorthodox? Does Hyper-Calvinism kill a love for souls? Does Hyper-Calvinism eliminate the need for evangelism? Does Hyper-Calvinism undermine the purpose of prayer? In this study, Jared Smith responds to these charges, setting forth an argument that not only are Hyper-Calvinists orthodox, but they alone nurture an authentic love for souls, fulfill the great work…
-
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…
